Monday, November 28, 2011

Welcome back from the holidays.  I hope everyone had a fantastic Thanksgiving.

This week, students will be focusing on the concept of biodiversity as they research various biomes. 

Today, students completed vocabulary and took notes on Biotic and Abiotic factors.  Their homework is to answer two open-ended questions on their notes foldable.  Also, several students did not complete the essay they were to write about aquifers and groundwater.  This essay, to be done in the journal, is a major grade.  Please ensure that it is done.

The next Current Event is due Friday.  

Importance of Online Surveys

I am learning a big lesson on paper surveys, namely, use online instead.  Have spent hours going through student surveys and am still working.  I did the same type of survey with teachers using Survey Monkey and it took just a few minutes.  When I do the mid-year survey, I will find a way to do student surveys online.  More data coming as surveys are dissagragated. 

Surveys out; still no Ipods

It's been over a month and we are still waiting on Ipods to be delivered.  Each teacher has theirs, but we need student sets now.  Continuing to wait and contact people to find out what is going on.

On a positive note, student surveys have been sent out are slowly coming back in.  Preliminary data shows that most students have at least some experience using Ipods, although most of it is for entertainment purposes.  However, it seems that we have a fairly large number of 7th grade students who do not have any computers or internet access at home.  This was not surprising, but it does limit the tyoe of homework and assignments that we can give. I should have all of the surveys done next week and start diagregating data.  I am very interested to see how the 8th graders fair on the preliminary technology survey.

Surveys ready

Surveys are ready to go out and Ipods will be delivered next week.  Both students and teachers will be taking a preliminary survey about their previous experience using Ipod technology as well as how they currently use it.  The surveys will also solicit ideas about how they think the technology would best be used in the classroom.  It will interesting to see how they respond.  In addition, I will be gathering information on how much computer/internet access students have available outside of school.  While this information is not directly related to the project, it may play a role in how well students are able to use the technology initially.  It will also help us see how effective it will be to send home work that may require internet use. 

Next week, Ipods will be delivered and teacher training will begin.  I heard one teacher this week state that she would rather not even have them.  Hopefully, that mindset will change.  As usual, anytime something new is tried, it takes time for it to be accepted. 

Updated Action Research Plan

Ipod Use in the Classroom
Goal: To effectively implement Ipods into Science classes to improve student achievement in Science classes
Action Steps(s):	Person(s) Responsible:	Timeline: Start/End	Needed Resources	Evaluation
Administer Pre-Ipod Survey to teachers and students	Breck Quarles;  Advisory teachers (for student surveys)	Sept. 2011-Oct. 2011	Survey Monkey (for teachers); Paper Survey (for students)	Analyze surveys for teacher/student familiarity and comfort with  Ipods and teacher ideas for effective use
Train teachers in effective classroom use of Ipods	Lisa Covington; Shannon Leisure; District Technology Specialists	Sept. 2011 - December 2011 (training to be done on Tuesdays during conference times)	Ipod training materials provided by PISD Technology Department	Lesson plans will be evaluated for evidence of Ipod use;  Field notes will be taken during Science classes
Create a DropBox folder to hold teacher lesson ideas/applications	Breck Quarles;  PISD Technology Department	September 2011	Drop Box Account	DropBox folder will be checked weekly for new information and additions by teachers/technology staff
Survey teachers and students each 9 weeks to gather data on motivation level of students	Breck Quarles;  Advisory Teachers (administer student surveys)	October 2011 – May 2012	Survey Monkey; Paper Surveys	Evaluate surveys, looking for increased trends in student motivation in Science as well as evidence of teacher use of Ipods in lessons; include evaluation of the number of minutes of student Ipod use in classrooms
Meet with Science teachers regularly to evaluate progress of implementation and  to support teachers during implementation	Lisa Covington;  Breck Quarles	October 2011-May 2012 (monthly department meeting)	Lesson plans; anecdotal evidence from teachers; student work products	Discuss progress/concerns and develop ideas for improved implementation of Ipod technology
Evaluate CBA/Benchmark Test Data from DMAC	Breck Quarles; Lisa Covington; Leslie McGehee;  Michelle Walter; Casey Williams	September 2011-May 2012	DMAC	Compare trends in student progress before and during Ipod implementation
Evaluate STAAR test scores in light of  previous TAKS scores	Breck Quarles; Lisa Covington; Michelle Walter;  Casey Williams	May/June 2012	DMAC;  STAAR Test results	Compare STAAR data to previous TAKS data as well as to CBA/Benchmark data for 8th grade;  look for continuous improvement
Evaluate student journals/class work	Breck Quarles; Leslie McGehee; Lisa Covington; Michelle Walter; Casey Williams	Ongoing – September 2011-May 2012	Student Science Journals; student work products	Evaluate journals for evidence of increased understanding of Science and improvement in depth of entries; evaluate other student artifacts for evidence of increased understanding/depth
Administer end of year survey to students/teachers	Breck Quarles	May 2012	Survey Monkey; paper survey	Compare end of year surveys to pre-Ipod survey to look for student/teacher growth
Meet with stakeholders to discuss results, evaluate effectiveness of Ipods, and determine strategies for more effective use	Breck Quarles; Lisa Covington; Larissa Loveless; Shannon Leisure; Science teachers; SBDM Committee	June 2012	Data gathered during school year	Measure actual to expected results;  develop plans to increase effectiveness of technology for upcoming school year

Reflections on Research Course

Before I post the reflection below, I must share that this week has been a series of small inquiry projects for me.  I took over another teacher's class while she is on maternity leave and knew next to nothing about the students.  In addition, I had the "well-behaved" advanced kids in my normal classroom, but now I am in a  room with a wide array of ability levels as well as behaviors.  Looking back on the week, I realized that I have used the inquiry methods from this course, albeit in small amounts, to bring order to this classroom as well as discover some new means to reach and teach the variety of learners that I have during my time in this room.  Now to the reflection.

Reflections on EDLD 5301-Research

                When this course began, I was quite concerned that it would be all about statistics and other data collection methods requiring all sorts of mathematical abilities that I fear I don’t possess.  Therefore, I was pleasantly surprised to learn about action research and what it entails.  It was especially enlightening to learn that action research, unlike traditional research, uses an inside-out approach that focuses on the needs of the school rather than those of the researcher (Dana, 2009). Also, after reading Johnny Briseno’s dissertation in Week 2, my eyes were opened to the differences between traditional and action research.  Briseno interviewed a number of principals from successful schools with the same demographic and was able to glean insights from these interviews that could be applied to his own campus (Briseno, 2010).  This, to me, was research that had immediate impact.  While there are still concerns over my own project, I know that what I am doing has the potential to impact the school as well as my professional life.   

                During week 2, one of the main focuses was on what Dana (2009) describes as “wonderings.”  These are questions that the leader has developed regarding real world observations and dilemmas.  These wonderings can be driven by a number of different passions that the leader may have.  I found it helpful to examine wonderings from the various passions in the Dana text and develop my own in each of these areas.  This process has changed the way that I look at situations and caused me to regularly develop wonderings. In fact, I have more wonderings now than I can possibly research.  Maybe some can be picked up by others and used for school improvement.

                During Week 3, I learned the value of using a set format for developing the action research plan.  I chose to use the Tool 7.1 Action Planning Template from Harris, Edmondson, & Combs (2010).  This form provides a set process for thinking through the steps of the plan, as well as the people, resources, and timelines necessary.  Without this form, it would have been difficult to logically create my plan. As a person who likes to jump in feet first and test the water once I hit, it was helpful to have a template to pull me back to the task at hand.  I know that I will continue to modify this as I move along in the process of implementing the plan. 

                During the Week 4 video, Dr. Elvis Arterbury and Dr. Steve Jenkins discussed the value of collaboration and sharing of ideas among peers.  They made two points that stuck with me.  First, a graduate course such as this one should be a safe place to share thoughts and ideas as well as make mistakes (Arterbury & Jenkins, 2011).  I have been impressed with the levels of expertise of my peers and very encouraged by their comments.  I have also been moved by the amount of help that people seek from and give to peers as they work through this course and ultimately, through their project.  The use of blogs has also been a way to help share and receive effective comments regarding the project.  In addition, our group has set up a Facebook site to help each other with questions and concerns and to just vent, when needed.  All of these work together to create a community of learners who help each other even though we may never meet outside of the digital world.  In fact, it was two of my peers who, through their discussion board comments, helped me decide to change the scope of my project.  I am grateful to them for their honesty. The second point that was made in the video is that this collaboration is a reflection of what should be going on at the campus level (Arterbury & Jenkins, 2011).  The experience of openly sharing ideas and concerns with peers now should be a model of what can happen between leaders, teachers, and other stakeholders in the school.  This will be the ideal to shoot for starting even before becoming an “official” campus leader. 

                From this point forward, my main concern is going to be developing a work schedule for completing this action research project.  This will take some focused effort on my part, but with the help and encouragement of my supervisor and peers, I know it will be done effectively.  I look forward to reporting the results on this blog as this process continues to completion, or at least to a point where new questions can be developed and researched. 

Resources

Arterbury, E. & Jenkins, S. (2011).  EDLD 5301 Week 4 Lecture.  [Online video] Lamar University.  Retrieved from https://lamar.epiclms.net/Learn/Player.aspx?enrollmentid=21401

Dana, N. F. (2009).  Leading with Passion and Knowledge:  The Principal as Action Researcher.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Harris, S., Edmondson, E., & Combs, J. (2010).  Examining What We Do To Improve Our Schools: 8 Steps from Analysis to Action.  Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education

Briseno, J. (2010).  The Effective Practices and Beliefs of School Principals in High Achieving Hispanic Majority Mid-Level Schools (Doctoral dissertation).   Retrieved from https://lamar.epiclms.net/Learn/Player.aspx?enrollmentid=21401

Site supervisor meeting and survey making

This week I was able to sit down with my site supervisor and hash out the final steps to my Action Research Plan.  I had already narrowed it down a bit thanks to the comments from my peers. (You guys are great!!!)  She added some extra clarification that should help the entire project flow smoother.  Now, I just need to make the final changes and get it posted again.  I also found out how difficult survey making is.  I am still working out the details for my initial survey.  The Ipods haven't been reissued yet, so I have a few more days to get it done.  Honestly, I am in awe of the people who do surveys for a living.  It is not easy to get it just right.  Later this week, I will have the latest revision of the research plan posted and will look forward to any comments.  I've also enjoyed following the blogs of my classmates and peers.  It is a priviledge to work with such creative, intelligent people. 

Concerns with Action Research Plan

I have several concerns with the action research plan that I have developed.  These may or may not be legitimate.  First, I'm concerned that it will be difficult to measure the actual effect of Ipod implementation on student progress because of all of the other factors involved.  These include a new curriculum (C-Scope) as well as teacher efficacy, both of which could produce positive results regardless of the technology used.  Second, much of the evidence will be anecdotal from surveys and interviews.  I'm wondering how this will effect results.  I know that, in the Dana text, Leading with Passion and Knowledge: The Principal as Action Researcher, anecdotal evidence is considered valid.  I just want to be sure that the evidence that I gather  shows evidence of the effectiveness of the implementation of IPods in Science classes.  Finally, effectiveness of Ipods in classes may be affected by the manner in which teachers implement the technology.  As the researcher, I feel that I have to, as much as possible, ensure that teachers are implementing the technology with fidelity.  I have tried to include this in the plan through training, which was already scheduled, as well as opportunity for mutual teacher support in the process.  In a nutshell, this a new journey and I want to be sure, as much as possible, that the plan is laid out effectively and will reflect the actual results of the technology.

Draft Action Research Plan

Ipod Use in the Classroom
Goal: To effectively implement Ipods into Science classes to improve standardized test scores as well as motivation in Science classes
Action Steps(s):	Person(s) Responsible:	Timeline: Start/End	Needed Resources	Evaluation
Administer Pre-Ipod Survey to teachers and students	Breck Quarles;  Advisory teachers (for student surveys)	Sept. 2011-Oct. 2011	Survey Monkey (for teachers); Paper Survey (for students)	Analyze surveys for teacher/student familiarity and comfort with  Ipods and teacher ideas for effective use
Train teachers in effective classroom use of Ipods	Lisa Covington; Shannon Leisure; District Technology Specialists	Sept. 2011 - December 2011 (training to be done on Tuesdays during conference times)	Ipod training materials provided by PISD Technology Department	Lesson plans will be evaluated for evidence of Ipod use;  Field notes will be taken during Science classes
Create a DropBox folder to hold teacher lesson ideas/applications	Breck Quarles;  PISD Technology Department	September 2011	Drop Box Account	DropBox folder will be checked weekly for new information and additions by teachers/technology staff
Survey teachers and students each 9 weeks to gather data on motivation level of students	Breck Quarles;  Advisory Teachers (administer student surveys)	October 2011 – May 2012	Survey Monkey; Paper Surveys	Evaluate surveys, looking for increased trends in student motivation in Science as well as evidence of teacher use of Ipods in lessons
Meet with Science teachers regularly to evaluate progress of implementation and  to support teachers during implementation	Lisa Covington;  Breck Quarles	October 2011-May 2012 (monthly department meeting)	Lesson plans; anecdotal evidence from teachers; student work products	Discuss progress/concerns and develop ideas for improved implementation of Ipod technology
Evaluate CBA/Benchmark Test Data from DMAC	Breck Quarles; Lisa Covington; Leslie McGehee;  Michelle Walter; Casey Williams	September 2011-May 2012	DMAC	Compare trends in student progress before and during Ipod implementation
Evaluate STAAR test scores in light of  previous TAKS scores	Breck Quarles; Lisa Covington; Michelle Walter;  Casey Williams	May/June 2012	DMAC;  STAAR Test results	Compare STAAR data to previous TAKS data as well as to CBA/Benchmark data for 8th grade;  look for continuous improvement
Evaluate student journals/class work	Breck Quarles; Leslie McGehee; Lisa Covington; Michelle Walter; Casey Williams	Ongoing – September 2011-May 2012	Student Science Journals; student work products	Evaluate journals for evidence of increased understanding of Science and improvement in depth of entries; evaluate other student artifacts for evidence of increased understanding/depth
Administer end of year survey to students/teachers	Breck Quarles	May 2012	Survey Monkey; paper survey	Compare end of year surveys to pre-Ipod survey to look for student/teacher growth
Meet with stakeholders to discuss results, evaluate effectiveness of Ipods, and determine strategies for more effective use	Breck Quarles; Lisa Covington; Larissa Loveless; Shannon Leisure; Science teachers; SBDM Committee	June 2012	Data gathered during school year	Measure actual to expected results;  develop plans to increase effectiveness of technology for upcoming school year