Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

EDLD 5301 Week 4 Assignment by MJJKZn


									Jeff Liwag
EDLD 5301 Research-ET8019

Week 4 Assignment: Background – Developing Consensus and Addressing Challenges in
your Action Research Plan

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
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
                      Identify highlights or key
                     insights from the conference               Identify highlights or
                                                               key insights from the
                      Describe any changes or
                     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
      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

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
 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.”
       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
1. scope and depth of proposed action research will be further limited (also applicable to numbers 4 and 5
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.

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
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

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.

To top