VIEWS: 56 PAGES: 8 POSTED ON: 6/14/2012
Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Week 4 Assignment: Background – Developing Consensus and Addressing Challenges in your Action Research Plan Overview The first three weeks of this course have focused on exploring topics or questions for action research, examining background information on the topics and questions, and designing an action research plan to address the questions or topics you have identified. This week and the next will provide you an opportunity to review your draft action research plan, confer with your site supervisor and reach consensus on your question(s) or topic(s) and design of your action research plan. You will also have an opportunity to study some additional strategies to sustain and support your action research. Remember, your action research plan, process, progress and project may take several weeks or several months to complete. One of the key goals of this course is providing an effective blueprint, a how to conduct an effective action research project in collaboration with your site supervisor(s), peers, Instructional Associates, and university faculty. Learning Outcomes: 1) Examine research strategies designed to sustain action research. 2) Learn the process of reaching consensus with the site supervisor and university professor in the monitoring and evaluation of the effectiveness of the research design and implementation. (It should be noted that monitoring is designed to assist and support the student and site supervisor throughout the duration of the research project. The larger project or multiple smaller research projects will be completed during the 18-month internship for those students who have just completed EDLD 5311). Performance Outcomes: 1) Describe research strategies to support and sustain ongoing action research. 2) Reach consensus with the site supervisor on the overall internship plan, including the action research plan to be implemented. (Note: The site supervisor must sign or use email verification of approval. The approved overall plan will be uploaded to the Electronic Portfolio). Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Rubric Use the following Rubric to guide your work on the Week 4 Assignment. Tasks Accomplished Proficient Needs Improvement The evidence suggests that this work is a The evidence suggests that The evidence does not yet “Habit of Mind.” The educator is ready to performance on this work make the case for the mentor others in this area. matches that of a strong educator being proficient at educator. this task. Action Research – Student provides a clear description of Student briefly describes at Student only describes one Identifying the following strategies: least two of the strategies, but strategy and does not strategies to does not discuss how the discuss how the strategies Force field analysis support and sustain strategies may improve his or may improve his or her action research Delphi method her action research plan. action research plan. Nominal group techniques (2 Points) (1 Point) Student also discusses how he or she can use these strategies to improve their action research plan. (4 Points) CARE Model and Student clearly addresses all areas of the Student addresses each of the Student fails to address your Action CARE Model and provides at least two areas of the CARE Model but each of the areas of the Research Plan points under each of the following topics: provides less than two points CARE Model and provides under each of the key topics: no follow up points under Concerns each area: Concerns Affirmations Concerns Affirmations Recommendations Affirmations Recommendations Evaluations Recommendations (8 – 10 Points) Evaluations (5 – 7 Points) Evaluations (1 – 4 Points) Responses to Peer Student describes comments from at Student describes comments Student describes one Comments and least two peers (i.e., other students) from one student regarding their comment about their Action Recommendations regarding their Action Research Plan of Action Research Plan and Research Plan but fails to Action, and identifies any revisions or identifies any changes made to identify what impact or changes made to their Action Research their plan as a result of the changes resulting from the Plan based on the comments and comments and suggestions. comments and suggestions. suggestions. (2 Points) ( 1 Point) (3 Points) Site Supervisor(s) Students provide a description of their Students provide a brief Students provide a partial Conference and conference with their site supervisor(s) to description of the conference description of the Consensus discuss and attempt to agree on the with the site supervisor(s) but conference with the site Action Research Plan. The description only addresses two of the supervisor(s). includes: critical components. Those (1 Point) components include: What happened during the conference (who, when, where, What happened during the conference (who, Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 what happened)? when, where, what happened)? Identify highlights or key insights from the conference Identify highlights or key insights from the Describe any changes or conference revisions made to the Action Research Plan as a result of the Describe any changes conference or revisions made to the (3 Points) Action Research Plan as a result of the conference (2 Points) Assignment Responses are relevant to course Responses are relevant to Responses do not reflect Mechanics content; no errors in grammar, spelling, course content; few errors in knowledge of course or punctuation. Students demonstrate grammar, spelling, or content, lack clarity and proper APA style. punctuation. depth, and/or include (3 Points) (2 Points) multiple errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation. (1 Point) Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Week Four Assignment, Part 1 – Strategies to support and sustain action research You now have your draft Action Research Plan, but this plan is a guide, a blueprint, and like most blueprints, it may need to be reviewed, revised and improved. This activity should provide you with some strategies to address this ongoing review process. Please read Chapter 8, Sustaining Improvement, in the Harris et al. text, pp. 91 – 103, and specifically focus on Strategies for Sustaining Improvement, pp. 94 – 97, and briefly describe: Force Field Analysis Delphi Method Nominal Group Technique Write a brief reflection on what you learned from examining these three strategies – describe any ways you might be able to use these strategies. Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Workspace Complete Part 1 of the assignment below. The box will expand as you type. Force Field Analysis According to Harris, Edmonson, & Combs (2010), Kurt Lewin's “Force Field Analysis,” is a tool that is based on his theory that, “in order for change to occur, the driving forces for the change must exceed the resisting forces against the change,” and that “bringing about change begins with understanding the circumstances surrounding the needed change.” The steps for conducting a Force Field Analysis include describing the current situation and proposed change; identifying the succeeding events if no change happens, the “forces” that drive the suggested change, as well as the “forces” that resist the change; determining if the change is “viable;” and determining what is needed to implement the change if it is deemed viable. Delphi Method Harris et al. (2010) described the Delphi Method as, “an excellent tool for developing deeper understanding,” and is “an important strategy for identifying ways to sustain improvement and looking futuristically at school needs,” which “relies on a panel of experts or people who would be affected by the decision or change.” This method is used often because it is an easy way to make decisions that involve up to 20 people but still maintain confidentiality in each participant's response. Panel members or participants fill up questionnaires in rounds, in between each the facilitator summarizes the responses and sometimes might even provide the rationale for said responses. Doing such, the panel members are given the chance to consider changing their responses. These steps are repeated until the group reaches a level of consensus. Nominal Group Technique The Nominal Group Technique is a technique used to build consensus in working towards school improvement. This can be done during a staff meeting, with a facilitator asking each staff member to write down issues or concerns, sharing these concerns among a small group and then having the facilitator write these for everyone to see but not allowing for discussion, having the small groups discuss each issue or concern that was raised and written for clarification, then asking the small group members to assign a ranking for each issue or concern. Harris et al. (2010) point out that the “facilitator must not be judgmental or allow judgmental comments from participants as they work through the issued for clarification.” Reflection Of the three strategies, the Force Field Analysis is the only one I have seen and participated in. It bears a close resemblance to the “ABC” approach used in Functional Behavioral Assessments (or FBA), which involve observing the Antecedents, Behaviors, and Consequences. This approach also makes the most sense to me as it involves an in-depth analysis of causes and effects as well as the ramifications and hindrances to a proposed change. Therefore, it is the one I will most likely use, either entirely in its pure form (as described in the book), or as part of behavior modification. The Delphi Method can be misconstrued as artificially building consensus as the process describes influencing participants by implicit “peer pressure.” I can probably use this in my classroom, although I imagine it will take too much time just to make decisions. The best use for the Nominal Group Technique is – as described in the book – during staff meetings. This is actually how our Campus Improvement Committee drafts and finalizes our Campus Improvement Plans, as well as in other committee meetings. Harris, S., Edmonson, S., & Combs, J. (2010). Examining what we do to improve our schools: 8 Steps from analysis to action. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education. Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Week Four Assignment, Part 2 The Harris et al. text provides an excellent model to help leaders sustain what is working well, while supporting or building strategies for future improvement. Review Tool 8.1 CARE Model: Planning Tool and complete the form explaining how your Action Research Plan corresponds to each of the tools of the CARE Model: (e.g., identifying what future focused concerns will be addressed by your Action Research Plan; describe at least three positive aspects of your current campus that need to be sustained to support the Action Research Plan; describe how your Action Research Plan has SMART recommendations or goals; and identify how you will evaluate your Action Research Plan). The CARE Model review will provide you with a strong rationale and framework to enrich your Action Research Plan conference with your site supervisor. Examining What We Do to Improve Our Schools Sandra Harris, Stacey Edmonson, Julie Combs Tool 8.1 CARE Model: Planning Tool Identify Concerns that must change (look to the future) (Assign points to concerns from 1 to 3 in the order of the most important issues to consider.) 1. reliability and validity 2. bias 3. assessments / instruments Identify Affirmations that must be sustained (look to the present) (Assign points to affirmations from 1 to 3 in the order of the most important issues to consider.) 1. student passing rate 2. cooperative teachers 3. test scores available and accessible SMART Recommendations that must be implemented: (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, Timely) (Assign points to recommendations from 1 to 3 in the order of the most important recommendations to implement.) 1. scope and depth of proposed action research will be further limited (also applicable to numbers 4 and 5 below) 2. survey responses will inevitably be affected by individual bias, but teachers will be reminded that they and the students will remain anonymous, and that the study will potentially be helpful and beneficial to them and their students. 3. sample size cannot be changed, thus literary review will be conducted. EVALUATE – Specifically and Often (Identify the best ways to evaluate the implemented recommendations.) 1. preliminary findings will determine scope and depth of proposed action research 2. depth and variance of survey responses will determine interventions/modifications to be taken 3. literary review will be conducted regardless of sample size Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Week Four Assignment, Part 3 – Peer suggestions and revisions We ask that you develop your blog and participate in the Discussion Boards to try to provide you some opportunities to learn from your peers. We strongly recommend that you continue to share your action research plan, process and progress throughout the completion of your project. You will learn from this sharing. As you progress with your research, your professors hope to assist you by linking you to similar action research projects. For example, if you have decided to research the question, “How can block scheduling improve classroom instruction?,” we will make every effort to connect you to all of the other action research projects examining block scheduling. At this point, we ask you to review at least two comments about your Action Research Plan from your blog and identify or describe any changes or revisions you might make in your plan based on the feedback. In writing your reflections on these comments, be sure to identify the comments that caught your attention and describe how these comments contributed to any revisions of your action research plan. If comments indicated that you should keep the plan as is, please describe what was shared that led you to not change your plan. Workspace Complete Part 3 of the assignment below. The box will expand as you type. Admittedly, I have been pleasantly surprised at the positive reactions and show of support by my peers. Almost all of them have expressed great interest in the findings of my action research as well as assuring me that my action research did not need any revisions, but quite a few have offered suggestions, recommendations, and/or their own experience on the subject matter. One of the comments that caught my attention was regarding the use of technology. Even though I cannot add this to my action research as it will expand the scope and lead the research to a different direction, I still value this input not only because it ties in with the graduate program, but offers a different perspective as well. Another comment that has definitely made an impact was one regarding the research methodology's validity. He asked if I will be able to determine if it is the differentiated instruction or the collaborative instruction that has caused any changes and that “these two approaches can and will create similar results and there is no real way to measure and distinguish between the two.” That was enough to make me revise my question. Furthermore, I will modify my action research plan to address this, as well as planning to conduct a literary review to complement and supplement my action research. One more comment that has made me revise my action research plan was to use surveys instead of journal entries, and that is exactly what I will do. Jeff Liwag EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019 Week Four Assignment, Part 4 – Site Supervisor Conference and Consensus on your Action Research Plan Throughout this course, we have asked you to collaborate with your site supervisor(s) in designing and implementing your action research plan. During Week Four, we hope you will be able to schedule an appointment with your site supervisor(s) to review your action research plan. Try to reach consensus on the action research topic and plan. Describe the conference, review your draft Action Research Plan using your Tool 7.1 template or your SIP/PIP template. Be sure to identify any recommended changes or revisions, and then submit the agreed upon Action Research Plan and your Intern Plan into your E-Portfolio. The submission to the Electronic Portfolio should be completed by Week Five. For Part 4 of this week’s assignment, write a description of your conference with your site supervisor(s), include insights into what was discussed, and identify any revisions to your Action Research Plan and template. Workspace Complete Part 4 of the assignment below. The box will expand as you type. My site supervisor has repeatedly assured me of his support, and reiterated the importance of my action research. In our previous conference, we have both concluded that it will be beneficial for me, my students, and my colleagues if I focus my action research on the effectiveness of educating special needs students in inclusion classrooms in comparison with self-contained or Resource classrooms. Initially, one goal was to compare the impact on students with special needs juxtaposed with that on the general education students, but during our most recent conference last Friday, I brought up the concern that it is difficult enough to ascertain the effectiveness on the students with special needs of their placement, but evaluating the effects on their general education counterparts would make it too complex and broad. He agreed, and as such my research will focus on the students with special needs. I have also revised the Plan of Action to use surveys instead of (and replacing) long-form responses in journal entries, as well as including literature review to complement and supplement my research findings. Blog – Also post your agreed upon Action Research Plan and encourage others to post comments as you continue to describe the process and progress implementing the plan.
Pages to are hidden for
"EDLD 5301 Week 4 Assignment"Please download to view full document