EDLD 5326 Week 5 Update on Action Research Plan
Two schools in our district have academically unacceptable ratings and we have to find ways to increase student achievement. One area that we have been told to focus on is the use of technology in the classroom to engage students. Also, our STaR Chart data indicates that we need to improve in the areas of teacher preparation and development in technology. In an effort to make a difference in this area, I have developed a professional development initiative called Bloomin’ SMART. This professional development is voluntary and was designed to train teachers to use interactive whiteboard software to create lessons that are aligned to district and state standards and provide differentiated learning. The purpose of this action research is to understand the effects of the Bloomin’ SMART project and to see if there is an increase in student engagement because of the application of this technology use in the classroom.
I want to find out if teachers are offered voluntary, extended professional development that is both face-to-face and online through a district developed Project Share course with the focus on using SMART Notebook to create lessons that are differentiated based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, will those teachers be able to implement those lessons in the classroom and improve student engagement and academic achievement? To learn more about the benefits of Bloomin' SMART, I have conducted a literature review about the use of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) and the effects this has on student achievement.
An orientation session for the course was held from 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. in the district's Multipurpose Facility on March 20, 2012 and March 21, 2012. To participate in the program, the teacher participants must have attended one of the orientation sessions.
The course was divided into 10 submitting periods. Participants could submit a maximum total of 10 lessons during the entire course. Only one lesson could be submitted per submitting period, during the first 5 submitting periods of the course. However, two lessons could be submitted per submitting period, during the last 5 submitting periods beginning with the May 25, 2012, submitting period. Participants were not required to submit a lesson for every submission period to stay in the course. The course ended July 9, 2012, with the submission of the final SMART notebook lesson(s).
Each participant received $100 per lesson that met the Target Tech qualifications listed in the Bloomin' SMART rubric. Therefore, if a participant submitted the maximum number of lessons, the participant could receive $1,000.
I plan to analyze quantitative student achievement data by comparing 2011-2012 benchmark tests, and standardized test scores to those in 2012-2013 and compare the results of all of the participant teachers’ with non-participant teachers’ student scores. 2012 data will be used as a comparison before the lessons from the training was implemented in 2013.
In addition, I will engage in additional data analysis completed from a combination of qualitative data collection strategies after the teachers implement their Bloomin’ SMART lessons in the classroom during the 2012-2013 school year. This data will include field notes, several teacher and student interviews, a collection of student work through examples, several digital photos and video of students completing Bloomin’ SMART lessons in order to fully demonstrate and capture the effects of Bloomin’ SMART on the teachers and students involved.
The professional development phase of the project has been completed and these are the results.
• 29 teachers volunteered for the project.
• 13 of the 29 volunteer teachers submitted lessons.
• 56 Bloomin’ SMART lessons were submitted from the 13 participants.
During the 2012-2013 School year, data will be collected from the 13 participant teachers and their students to determine the full effect of the action research.
Sunday, September 30, 2012
Sunday, August 5, 2012
5397 Week 3 Draft Action Research Project Progress Report
Draft Action Research Project Progress Report
EdCompass Blog. (2011) T.H.E. Journal Whitepaper Examines Role of Interactive Whiteboards in
Title Bloomin’ SMARTs Effect on Student Performance
Is there improved academic performance of the students whose teachers participated in the Bloomin' SMART professional development program and implement the lessons from the professional development in their classes?
Needs Assessment
Our junior high school has an academically unacceptable rating. During an external audit of this school, it was found that the students need to be more engaged with technology to increase student achievement.
The Texas Education Agency Academic Excellence Indicator System 2010-2011 Campus Performance report for Connally Junior High expresses performance on the TAKS in all tested subjects by all students and subgroups in each grade level.
In the 7th grade, there were 12 subgroups that had academically unacceptable scores. The report indicates that the African American (46%), Hispanic (52%), Special Education (47%), Economically Disadvantaged (54%) and LEP (60%) subgroups as well as the “all student” (57%) group had academically unacceptable scores in mathematics. Although the Hispanic subgroup was only 1 percentage point from being academically acceptable in reading, the Hispanic (69%), Special Education (47%) and LEP (60%) subgroups were academically unacceptable in reading. However, all subgroups were academically acceptable in writing, except for Special Education (59%) and LEP (40%) (Texas Education Agency [TEA], 2011).
In the 7th grade, there were 10 subgroups that had academically acceptable scores. The results indicate that White (71%) was the only academically acceptable subgroup in math and exceeded the 65% academically acceptable passing standard. “All students” (77%), Hispanic (76%), White (83%) and Economically Disadvantaged (75%) all had academically acceptable scores of at least 70% in reading. While “all students” (88%), African American (85%), Hispanic (87%), White (90%) and Economically Disadvantaged (89%) had academically acceptable performance of at least 70% in writing.
The two-year comparison for 7th grade shows a decrease in the performance on all tests for all subgroups from 2010 to 2011, except for the increase in writing for Hispanics (1%), Whites (1%) and Economically Disadvantaged (2%) (TEA, 2011).
In the 8th grade, the report indicates that only African American (58%) and LEP (50%) subgroups had academically unacceptable scores in mathematics. The only subgroup academically unacceptable in reading was LEP (29%). Also, the only subgroups that were academically acceptable in science were African American (55%) and LEP (29%) (TEA, 2011).
In the 8th grade, there were 23 subgroups that had academically acceptable scores. In reading, “all students” (82%), African American (84%), Hispanic (76%), White (86%), Special Education (89%) and Economically Disadvantaged (76%) all had academically acceptable scores of at least 70%. In math, “all students” (72%), Hispanic (82%), White (75%), Special Education (68%) and Economically Disadvantaged (66%) all had academically acceptable scores of at least 65%. In Science “all students” (75%), Hispanic (76%), White (89%), Special Education (84%) and Economically Disadvantaged (69%) all had academically acceptable scores of at least (60%). For social studies, all students and subgroups had an academically acceptable score of at least 70% in their performance with “all students” (93%), African American (89%), Hispanic (93%), White (95%), Special Education (83%) and Economically Disadvantaged (90%) (TEA, 2011).
The two-year comparison for 8th grade shows a decrease in the performance on all tests for all subgroups from 2010 to 2011, except for an increase in reading for Special Education (1%) and an increase in mathematics for Hispanic (9%) and an increase in science for Hispanic (11%), White (2%) and Special Education (9%) (TEA, 2011).
Although the campus average scores were in the academically acceptable range for all students in all subjects tested for both 7th and 8th grade, the campus received an unacceptable rating since there were subgroups in 7th grade reading and math and 8th grade reading, math and science with academically unacceptable performance standards (TEA, 2011).
Objectives and Vision of the Action Research Project
Vision:
To provide quality instruction that enhances student academic performance. In doing so, increase the use of technology in the classroom to engage students and improve academic performance.
Objective:
In an effort to understand the effects of increasing student engagement through technology, the following wondering was born. Will there be improved academic performance of the students whose teachers participated in the Bloomin' SMART professional development program and implement the lessons from the professional development in their classes? Bloomin’ SMART is a professional development incentive that will be provided to assist the teachers with technology integration to engage the students. This professional development is voluntary and will be designed to train teachers to use interactive whiteboard software to create lessons that are aligned to district and state standards and provide differentiated learning. The course will be both online and face-to-face. It will begin March 20, 2012 and continue through July 9, 2012. The teachers participating will implement the lessons from the professional development with their students this year and next school year, with the goal that 65% of all 6th, 7th and 8th grade students will meet or exceed the state standard on the state assessment in all tested subjects by the end of the school year (2012-2013).
Review of the Literature and Action Research Strategy
External audits revealed that the teachers need to incorporate technology into the classrooms to engage the students. Although we are not a 1:1 or Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) district, we are a fairly technology rich school district with SMARTboard or SMART slates in all science and math classrooms and document cameras and LCD projects in almost all of the classrooms. However, our STaR Chart data indicates that we need to improve in the areas of teacher preparation and development in technology. It was determined by the campus and district administrative team that professional development was needed to assist teachers with the integration of engaging technology in the classroom. It was also determined that this technology need to be differentiated for diverse learners.
I want to find out if when teachers are offered voluntary, extended professional development that is both face-to-face and online through a district developed Project Share course with the focus on using SMART Notebook to create lessons that are differentiated based on Bloom’s Taxonomy, will those teachers be able to implement those lessons in the classroom and improve student engagement and academic achievement?.
To learn more about the benefits of Bloomin' SMART, I have conducted the following literature review about lesson differentiation and the use of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) and the effects that these strategies have on student achievement.
The Edcompass blog (2011), reports that, “In February, T.H.E. Journal conducted a SMART-sponsored survey of its readers that focused on digital classroom technology. Over 80 percent of respondents said that their schools have at least one interactive whiteboard (IWB) and that their implementation of IWBs are having a positive effect on student learning outcomes.”
SMART Technologies Inc. (2006) conducted research that states that, “The interactive whiteboard has been incorporated into learning environments for over a decade, and an increasing flow of research into its impact is emerging from the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia. From the available body of research, several themes and patterns have emerged, including the positive effect interactive whiteboards have on student engagement, motivation, the ability to accommodate a variety of learning styles (including special needs students) and the capacity to enhance student understanding and review processes.”
Additionally, SMART Technologies Inc. (2006) stated that, “U.S.-based research further elucidates these points, and researchers and educators are in agreement that interactive whiteboards improve a student’s ability to retain and recall information presented in interactive-whiteboard lesson activity.”
Beeland (2002) conducted a study of ten middle school teachers and 197 students to determine if the use of interactive whiteboards had a positive effect on student engagement in the classroom. Beeland (2002) stated that “The results of the surveys and questionnaires indicated a strong preference for the use of interactive whiteboards in the classroom” (p. 1).
SMART Technologies Inc. (2009) states that, “ They (interactive white board lessons) can save time by giving teachers access to lesson activities, multimedia files and other resources to aid students’ self-directed learning and to differentiate instruction for their diverse learners.
I believe that incorporating Bloom’s Taxonomy into the lessons is vital and according to Heacox (2002), “The most effective way to help students meet standards is by differentiating your instruction” (p. 53).
According to Halocha (2007) “Almost all uses of ICT (Information and Communication Technology) can place children in positions where they can, at a level appropriate to age and ability, begin to critically analyze what is being provided through their use of ICT and how it is affecting their learning (metacognition)” (p. 127).
Articulate the Vision
This was a voluntary professional development opportunity. For teachers interested in participating, an orientation session for the course was held from 4:00 p.m. – 5:00 p.m. in the Connally Multipurpose Facility on March 20, 2012 and March 21, 2012. To participate in the program, the teacher participants must have attended one of the orientation sessions. During this session, the vision, purpose and requirements of the course were explained.
Manage the organization
The course was divided into 10 submitting periods. Participants could submit a maximum total of 10 lessons during the entire course. Only one lesson could be submitted per submitting period, during the first 5 submitting periods of the course. However, two lessons could be submitted per submitting period, during the last 5 submitting periods beginning with the May 25, 2012, submitting period. Participants were not required to submit a lesson for every submission period to stay in the course. The course ended July 9, 2012, with the submission of the final SMART notebook lesson(s).
Each participant received $100 per lesson that met the Target Tech qualifications listed in the Bloomin' SMART rubric. Therefore, if a participant submitted the maximum number of lessons, the participant could receive $1,000.
During the 2012-2013 school year, the participant teachers will present their Bloomin’ SMART lessons in their classes. I plan to analyze quantitative student achievement data by comparing 2011-2012 benchmark tests, and standardized test scores to those in 2012-2013 and compare the results of all of the participant teachers’ with non-participant teachers’ student scores. 2012 data will be used as a comparison before the lessons from the training was implemented in 2013.
In addition, I will engage in additional data analysis completed from a combination of qualitative data collection strategies after the teachers implement their Bloomin’ SMART lessons in the classroom during the 2012-2013 school year. This data will include field notes, several teacher and student interviews, a collection of student work through examples, several digital photos and video of students completing Bloomin’ SMART lessons in order to fully demonstrate and capture the effects of Bloomin’ SMART on the teachers and students involved.
Manage Operations
In the course the participant teachers had the opportunity to create and submit up to 10 SMART notebook lessons that were student-centered and differentiated for multiple learning styles by using Bloom's Taxonomy verbs and activities to actively engage their students. The professional development was from March 20, 2012 through July 9, 2012. It was offered in a blended style of face-to-face and online learning. Communication was provided by face-to-face conversations, email, phone calls and the online course discussion board. When several of the teachers express a concern that they were experiencing a busy spring semester due to testing, sports, end of school activities, etc., and were having difficulties submitting a lesson during each submitting period, I listened to their concerns and revised the course so that two lessons, instead of one, could be submitted during the last five submitting periods of the course. Therefore, this would allow the participant teachers the opportunity to submit all 10 of their Bloomin’ SMART lessons for the project during the summer if they were experiencing a busy spring semester.
Respond to Community Interest and Needs
The Bloomin’ SMART action research project is based upon lessons that are differentiated for the diverse needs of all students in the classroom. Each lesson is differentiated based on Bloom’s Taxonomy. Also, the Bloomin’ SMART lessons incorporate technology through the use of SMARTboards and SMARTslates, which through a literature review has shown to increase student engagement.
References
Beeland Jr., W.D. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning and technology: Can
interactive whiteboards help? Retrieved on August 3, 2012 from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/are/Artmanscrpt/vol1no1/beeland_am.pdf.
EdCompass Blog. (2011) T.H.E. Journal Whitepaper Examines Role of Interactive Whiteboards in
Student Learning. Retrieved on August 3, 2012 from http://edcompassblog.smarttech.com
/archives/3575
Halocha, J. (2007). Using ICT in Teaching. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Heacox, D. (2002). Differentiating Instruction in the Regular Classroom: How to Reach and
Teach All Learners, Grades 3-12. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.
SMART Technologies Inc. (2006). Interactive whiteboards and learning: Improving
student learning outcomes and streamlining lesson planning. Retrieved on August 3, 2012 from http://downloads01.smarttech.com/media/research/whitepapers/
SMART Technologies Inc. (2009. One, some, all: Creating technology enabled learning
environments to support flexible grouping. Retrieved on August 4, 2012 from
Texas Education Agency. (2011). Academic Excellence Indicator System 2010-2011: Campus
Performance for Connally Junior High [Data file]. Retrieved on August 3, 2012 from http://ritter.tea.state.txus/prefreport/aeis/2011/index.html
Sunday, April 1, 2012
Week 5 Reflection
In week 1, Dana (2009), offered a thorough explanation
of action research. In this reading the differences between action research
and traditional research were described. This helped to lay the foundation of
the course because until I read the assigned readings in week 1, I was
unfamiliar with the concept of action research. However after reading I
understood the concept and the value of action research for educational
leadership.
Also, essential to this course was the blog that was
created as part of the assignment in week 1. This blog became a great place
for me to reflect on and share my learning and action research project with
my classmates and professors. Also, I benefited from following others blogs
and learning about their action research. With an online class, I think the
blog has been conducive to helping to build a professional learning community
that is made up of my classmates.
As the course progressed to week 2, it was the
reading from Dana (2009), which helped to guide me in the direction of developing
my wondering. As I read about the 9 areas that were suggested as good places
to find my wondering, I began to develop my question.
Although I had developed my wondering in week 2, I
was not satisfied with the wording of my wondering, so I blogged about my
concern. It was a comment to my post from Mary Angel that helped me to edit
my wondering and make it more concise. She said that she had a similar
struggle with her wondering question and shared her solution. Although I had
seen examples of wondering statements in my reading, it was not until I read
Mary’s comment that it made sense to me.
I understood the concept of action research after
the week 1 reading assignment and I was pleased with the wondering question that
I had written for my action research, but the whole process of action
research was still not clear to me until week 3. It was the reading from Harris,
Edmondson and Combs (2009) that gave me the greatest insight into action research
with the description of the Framework for Examining School Improvement. It
was in this reading that the 8 steps were clearly explained.
The subsequent assignment in week 3 gave me the
opportunity to put what I had learned from the reading into practice. With
this knowledge, I began to follow the Framework described in the reading and
use the 8 step to write my plan.
The discussion board in week 3 gave me further confidence
in my wondering as several of my classmates replied and all gave me positive
feedback about my description of the context of my action research and explanation
of how it would be completed.
In week 4, the Harris et al. (2009) highlighted
the importance of “…sustaining improvement while at the same time looking
futuristically (or forecasting) to prepare for the future” (p. 93). The readings
continued to list and explain four strategies for sustaining improvement. Of
the four strategies, the one that captured my attention the most was the Delphi
Method. It seemed to me to be a simple and effective strategy to use to
gather feedback from a fairly large group. According to Harris et al. (2009),
“Generally, as the process continues, the range of responses decreases and
the group converges towards some level of consensus” (p.94).
Finally, in week 5, it was again a combination of
the reading and the application of this reading in the assignment that was
most valuable to me. Dana (2009) provided five quality indicators that are
designed to “…spark a discussion among you and your colleagues about what
constitutes quality” (p.179). Then the assignment required me to apply these
five indicators to my own action research. This helped me to assess the
quality of my inquiry. Since I am a novice action researcher, this was a
helpful assignment for me as it provided a way for me to check my plan and improve
it.
I must say before I close that I have also enjoyed
the weekly webinars hosted by Dr. Abshire. These webinars have been very informative
and have helped me to feel more connect to this class and not like I am out
here alone in an online class.
I have enjoyed this course and feel that I have
learned a great deal from it. I look forward to continuing the action
research that I started in this class and seeing it through to find out the
results. I am sure that action research will be an extremely valuable tool
that I will use as an educational leader and look forward to continuing to
develop my skills in this area.
of action research. In this reading the differences between action research
and traditional research were described. This helped to lay the foundation of
the course because until I read the assigned readings in week 1, I was
unfamiliar with the concept of action research. However after reading I
understood the concept and the value of action research for educational
leadership.
Also, essential to this course was the blog that was
created as part of the assignment in week 1. This blog became a great place
for me to reflect on and share my learning and action research project with
my classmates and professors. Also, I benefited from following others blogs
and learning about their action research. With an online class, I think the
blog has been conducive to helping to build a professional learning community
that is made up of my classmates.
As the course progressed to week 2, it was the
reading from Dana (2009), which helped to guide me in the direction of developing
my wondering. As I read about the 9 areas that were suggested as good places
to find my wondering, I began to develop my question.
Although I had developed my wondering in week 2, I
was not satisfied with the wording of my wondering, so I blogged about my
concern. It was a comment to my post from Mary Angel that helped me to edit
my wondering and make it more concise. She said that she had a similar
struggle with her wondering question and shared her solution. Although I had
seen examples of wondering statements in my reading, it was not until I read
Mary’s comment that it made sense to me.
I understood the concept of action research after
the week 1 reading assignment and I was pleased with the wondering question that
I had written for my action research, but the whole process of action
research was still not clear to me until week 3. It was the reading from Harris,
Edmondson and Combs (2009) that gave me the greatest insight into action research
with the description of the Framework for Examining School Improvement. It
was in this reading that the 8 steps were clearly explained.
The subsequent assignment in week 3 gave me the
opportunity to put what I had learned from the reading into practice. With
this knowledge, I began to follow the Framework described in the reading and
use the 8 step to write my plan.
The discussion board in week 3 gave me further confidence
in my wondering as several of my classmates replied and all gave me positive
feedback about my description of the context of my action research and explanation
of how it would be completed.
In week 4, the Harris et al. (2009) highlighted
the importance of “…sustaining improvement while at the same time looking
futuristically (or forecasting) to prepare for the future” (p. 93). The readings
continued to list and explain four strategies for sustaining improvement. Of
the four strategies, the one that captured my attention the most was the Delphi
Method. It seemed to me to be a simple and effective strategy to use to
gather feedback from a fairly large group. According to Harris et al. (2009),
“Generally, as the process continues, the range of responses decreases and
the group converges towards some level of consensus” (p.94).
Finally, in week 5, it was again a combination of
the reading and the application of this reading in the assignment that was
most valuable to me. Dana (2009) provided five quality indicators that are
designed to “…spark a discussion among you and your colleagues about what
constitutes quality” (p.179). Then the assignment required me to apply these
five indicators to my own action research. This helped me to assess the
quality of my inquiry. Since I am a novice action researcher, this was a
helpful assignment for me as it provided a way for me to check my plan and improve
it.
I must say before I close that I have also enjoyed
the weekly webinars hosted by Dr. Abshire. These webinars have been very informative
and have helped me to feel more connect to this class and not like I am out
here alone in an online class.
I have enjoyed this course and feel that I have
learned a great deal from it. I look forward to continuing the action
research that I started in this class and seeing it through to find out the
results. I am sure that action research will be an extremely valuable tool
that I will use as an educational leader and look forward to continuing to
develop my skills in this area.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
Week 4 Reflection
The focus of this week was to learn about four strategies for sustaining improvement.
- Force Field Analysis
- Delphi Method
- Nominal Group Technique
- CARE model
The assignment required me to summarize each of the strategies and then explain how I might be able to use the stategies in my action research. This really helped me to learn about the strategies and see how they could fit into my action research.
I am enjoying blogging and the professional learning community that is being created because of it. I like having a place to summarize what I have learned each week. I really appreciate my followers and check often to see if anyone has commented. I valuable the input from the comments and have made some revisions based on the comments. I am also enjoying following the blogs of others and I learn from them as well.
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Week 3 Draft Action Research Plan and Reflection
Draft Action Research Plan
SCHOOL VISION: To provide quality instruction that enhances student academic performance.
GOAL: We have two schools in our district that have academically unacceptable ratings. During audits of these schools by an external SIT, it was found that the students need to be more engaged with technology. A professional development initiative called Bloomin’ SMART will be provided to assist the teachers with technology integration to engage the students. This professional development is voluntary and will be designed to train teachers to use interactive whiteboard software to create lessons that are aligned to district and state standards and provide differentiated learning. The course will be both online and face-to-face. It will begin March 20, 2012 and continue through July 9, 2012. The teachers participating will implement the lessons from the professional development with their students this year and next school year. In an effort to understand the effects of increasing student engagement through technology, the following wondering was born.
Is there improved academic performance of the students whose teachers participated in the Bloomin' SMART professional development program and implement the lessons from the
professional development in their classes?
professional development in their classes?
1. Examining the Work: Setting the Foundation –
During external SIT audits of unacceptable campuses and meetings with principals and directors, the issue of the lack of integration of technology in the classroom to engage students with differentiated instruction is identified as a concern. Create course to provide professional development, Bloomin’ SMART, to train teachers to use interactive whiteboard software to create lessons that are aligned to district and state standards and provide differentiated learning.
2. Analyzing Data –
Use a variety of data collection strategies. Probable findings might include data that supports research that shows interactive whiteboards are effective tools for increasing student achievement. Analyze quantitative student achievement data by comparing 2011-2012 benchmark tests, and standardized test scores to those in 2012-2013.
Conduct electronic searches (Perform Google searches about the use of interactive whiteboards (IWB) and student achievement).
3. Developing Deeper Understanding –
Engage in additional data analysis completed from a combination of qualitative data
collection strategies. Including field notes, teacher and student interviews
and student work.
4. Engaging in Self-Reflection –
Participate in self-reflection of the Bloomin’ SMART professional development course and the interpretation of the data.
Is the online format of the professional development conducive to teacher learning and participation?
Are the teachers successfully creating lessons that meet the criteria of the rubric?
Are the teacher’s successfully implementing the lessons from the Bloomin’ SMART
training in their classes? If so, what is the effect on student engagement and
achievement?
5. Exploring Programmatic Patterns –
Explore the patterns and gaps that surface as a result of further analysis and reflection. Discuss outcomes of project with Site supervisor, principals and curriculum director. Formulate and answer applicable questions that will address the issues.
Is the program making a positive difference in student
achievement? Do any gaps exist?
What are the pros and cons of the Bloomin’ SMART
project?
Could anything be done to improve the project?
6. Determining Direction –
With Site supervisor, principals and curriculum director look at all of the previously gathered information and make decisions about project’s direction.
Should the program continue and be implemented on a larger scale?
7. Taking action for school improvement – See Plan of action to guide the action research.
Use a variety of data collection strategies. Probable findings might include data that supports research that shows interactive whiteboards are effective tools for increasing student achievement. Analyze quantitative student achievement data by comparing 2011-2012 benchmark tests, and standardized test scores to those in 2012-2013.
Conduct electronic searches (Perform Google searches about the use of interactive whiteboards (IWB) and student achievement).
3. Developing Deeper Understanding –
Engage in additional data analysis completed from a combination of qualitative data
collection strategies. Including field notes, teacher and student interviews
and student work.
4. Engaging in Self-Reflection –
Participate in self-reflection of the Bloomin’ SMART professional development course and the interpretation of the data.
Is the online format of the professional development conducive to teacher learning and participation?
Are the teachers successfully creating lessons that meet the criteria of the rubric?
Are the teacher’s successfully implementing the lessons from the Bloomin’ SMART
training in their classes? If so, what is the effect on student engagement and
achievement?
5. Exploring Programmatic Patterns –
Explore the patterns and gaps that surface as a result of further analysis and reflection. Discuss outcomes of project with Site supervisor, principals and curriculum director. Formulate and answer applicable questions that will address the issues.
Is the program making a positive difference in student
achievement? Do any gaps exist?
What are the pros and cons of the Bloomin’ SMART
project?
Could anything be done to improve the project?
6. Determining Direction –
With Site supervisor, principals and curriculum director look at all of the previously gathered information and make decisions about project’s direction.
Should the program continue and be implemented on a larger scale?
7. Taking action for school improvement – See Plan of action to guide the action research.
8. Sustaining improvement –
Learning to use the tools of action research as an on-going process for professional development and school improvement.
Continue to implement the features of this project that improved student achievement.
Share these results with district stakeholder and Lamar colleagues.
Week 3 Reflection
I feel like week 1 and 2 assignments, readings and lectures have provided the foundation for the week 3 assignment. Because of the knowledge that I have gained and helpful comments and suggestions from colleagues, I have edited my action research question. It is now less wordy and more to the point. I am pleased with it. The Week 3 lectures, readings and assignments have helped me to develop my action research plan to conduct my action research project. I like having the written plan as a guide or blueprint to follow. Although I will still probably need to make revisions to the plan, the pieces are starting to come together for me.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Week 2 Reflection
Lessons learned from Week 2:
I am now better able to define my action research after this week's assignement, videos and web conference. It is, Does Bloomin' SMART, a professional development initiative to train teachers to use interactive whiteboard software to create lessons that are aligned to district and state standards and provide differentiated learning, improve the academic performance of the students whose teachers participate in the program and implement the training in their classes? I still might need to refine it and make it less wordy. However, it meets important criteria of an action research study that I learned this week. From the scholar interviews, the importance of practical research was pointed out. This study would fit that criteria because it is of interest to me, provides focus and benefits students. From the web conference with Dr. Abshire, I became more aware the importance of longevity of the study. This study will span a period of approximately 10 months which should be an appropriate length. In addition, the web conference made me more keenly aware of how to better focus the topic. Another tip from the web conference that I want to remember to do is to search for another similar research project and see if I can replicate it. Finally, reading in the Dana (2009) book about the nine topics that are ripe for action research, of which mine is one (professional development), helped me to better understand why these areas would benefit from action research. Also this helped me to better understand how to formulate action research questions.
I am now better able to define my action research after this week's assignement, videos and web conference. It is, Does Bloomin' SMART, a professional development initiative to train teachers to use interactive whiteboard software to create lessons that are aligned to district and state standards and provide differentiated learning, improve the academic performance of the students whose teachers participate in the program and implement the training in their classes? I still might need to refine it and make it less wordy. However, it meets important criteria of an action research study that I learned this week. From the scholar interviews, the importance of practical research was pointed out. This study would fit that criteria because it is of interest to me, provides focus and benefits students. From the web conference with Dr. Abshire, I became more aware the importance of longevity of the study. This study will span a period of approximately 10 months which should be an appropriate length. In addition, the web conference made me more keenly aware of how to better focus the topic. Another tip from the web conference that I want to remember to do is to search for another similar research project and see if I can replicate it. Finally, reading in the Dana (2009) book about the nine topics that are ripe for action research, of which mine is one (professional development), helped me to better understand why these areas would benefit from action research. Also this helped me to better understand how to formulate action research questions.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Week One Assignment, Part 3 - Building a Blog on Action Research
What I have Learned about Action Research and How I Might be Able to Use It.
In this assignment I have learned that action research is a systematic discovery process. It is done by the insiders who are close to the issue rather than by outsiders who might not truly understand what is best for the school’s unique situation. The process of action research fosters collaboration and professional development among the leadership team or professional learning community involved in the process. This group identifies with the issue and by going through the process, they will feel ownership in the solution which increases the chances that the solution will have sustained success. The action research process begins with an issue or a change that is needed in order for there to be improvement. Then a clear and concise question is formed that will drive the inquiry. Data from a variety of sources will be collected in an effort to answer the question that has been asked. The data is scrutinized and then a decision will be reached based on the results of the inquiry. Then a plan of action will be developed, implemented and monitored to see if it produces the desired results. If so, it be maintained. If not, the process will continue to cycle until resolution is found.
Action research is a healthy process that requires a great deal of time, effort and reflection. However, the practice of inquire has many inherent benefits. It demonstrates to the rest of the school that the educational leader values learning and participates and collaborates in the problem solving process to make necessary improvements for the school. While at the same time, the reflection that is required by action research is helping those who practice it on a regular basis to become better decision makers and expert leaders.
Analysis of How Educational Leaders Might Use Blogs
Blogs are a valuable tool for educational leaders. For instance, blogs provide educational leaders with a medium to share and reflect with an audience of colleagues from around the world. It offers an anytime, anywhere, web-based way for the administrator to journal and to document his/her thoughts in a variety of formats ranging from written form to photographic form. Blogs provide the unique feature of not just one-way sharing with others, but with the comment feature, two-way collaboration and feedback provides valuable insight for the leader.
In addition, blogging is another way that educational leaders can serve as positive role models for their school. Blogging shows that the leader values the writing process and provides a good example for the students and staff to emulate.
In this assignment I have learned that action research is a systematic discovery process. It is done by the insiders who are close to the issue rather than by outsiders who might not truly understand what is best for the school’s unique situation. The process of action research fosters collaboration and professional development among the leadership team or professional learning community involved in the process. This group identifies with the issue and by going through the process, they will feel ownership in the solution which increases the chances that the solution will have sustained success. The action research process begins with an issue or a change that is needed in order for there to be improvement. Then a clear and concise question is formed that will drive the inquiry. Data from a variety of sources will be collected in an effort to answer the question that has been asked. The data is scrutinized and then a decision will be reached based on the results of the inquiry. Then a plan of action will be developed, implemented and monitored to see if it produces the desired results. If so, it be maintained. If not, the process will continue to cycle until resolution is found.
Action research is a healthy process that requires a great deal of time, effort and reflection. However, the practice of inquire has many inherent benefits. It demonstrates to the rest of the school that the educational leader values learning and participates and collaborates in the problem solving process to make necessary improvements for the school. While at the same time, the reflection that is required by action research is helping those who practice it on a regular basis to become better decision makers and expert leaders.
Analysis of How Educational Leaders Might Use Blogs
Blogs are a valuable tool for educational leaders. For instance, blogs provide educational leaders with a medium to share and reflect with an audience of colleagues from around the world. It offers an anytime, anywhere, web-based way for the administrator to journal and to document his/her thoughts in a variety of formats ranging from written form to photographic form. Blogs provide the unique feature of not just one-way sharing with others, but with the comment feature, two-way collaboration and feedback provides valuable insight for the leader.
In addition, blogging is another way that educational leaders can serve as positive role models for their school. Blogging shows that the leader values the writing process and provides a good example for the students and staff to emulate.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)