Sunday, September 29, 2013

Action Research Update

My action research changed much earlier in the program, due to my internship supervisors. They felt greater research was needed in the new category. I initially wanted to find if the new master schedule impacted standardized test scores, but they felt that was to easy. My new research topic is detailed below.

Title:
The Correlation of Academic Achievement and Student Involvement
Needs Assessment:
On our campus, there appears to be a certain lack of accountability for some students who are not actively involved in either a student organization or athletic group.  In recent times, there has been a push to establish a sense of buy-in and accountability with the students by pushing student involvement in athletic groups and student organizations.  Is there a correlation between student achievement among students who are actively involved versus students who have no school club involvement, athletic affiliation?  Should no such correlation exist and students be encouraged to focus on studies?
Objectives and Vision of the action research project:
A vision and vision statement will be developed with input from a coach, club sponsor, administrator, and team leader.  The action research project will include measureable objectives, timelines, data, and responsible person(s).
Review of the Literature and Action Research Strategy:
The Tuning Protocol developed by the Coalition of Essential Schools Project at Brown University will be the assessment system implemented.  This instrument was chosen because of its ability to recognize the complexities of developing assessments for projects, sharing feedback, clarifying questions without judging, receiving warm and cool feedback, reflection time and debriefing to arrive at a mutual conscious.
Articulate the Vision :
Faculty and staff learned of the action research project via their respective professional learning communities meeting.  Coaches and club sponsors received more detailed information from the printed material disseminated to them for their sport or organization.  Content specialist are primarily responsible for monitoring data and distributing info to professional learning communities within the school.  Parents and communities members are not informed until research is concluded.  At this time, they will be informed vita I.M.P.A.C.T. program. 


Manage the organization:
Self – pick a sample group, work closely with sponsors, specialist, and classroom teachers t monitor students’ progress, formulate plan or course of action based on results.
Content specialist- access data ranging from standardized test scores, attendance, and number grades to compare extra-curricular participants to those who are non-participants
Coaches  & Club Sponsors – monitor student athletes and participants,

Manage Operations:
N/A
Respond to Community Interest and Needs:
The action research who determine whether a need exist to further advocate for extra-curricular activities and if so, which activities do these students seem to benefit from most on an academic level.  Student involvement is not specific to a particular race, gender, or type of student.  It does not exclude those with special needs and can accommodate those labeled gifted.  Should there be no correlation or no data to support extracurricular or determine which type if any is more beneficial, results can be used to formulate new methods and strategies of reaching students on a larger scale.

Friday, March 29, 2013

EDLD 5364 -Course Based Embedded Assignment Reflection


Overall, I feel I was successful in completing the course assignments. The discussion postings and protocols were the same as I had experienced in other classes. The use of blog post every week was good practice to prepare us for integrating them into classroom instruction. Even the Adobe desktop videoconferencing was easy to participate in and very informative.
            Despite a detailed rubric and guiding questions,  I generally started to feel more comfortable in completing the group project when we were provided with an example. Based on the conversations among my team members, I believe we all felt uneasy about whether or not our project has hit the mark.
            I learned during the project that although my technology skills are well developed, using these skills to construct an interactive, multimedia lesson is more difficult than I thought. Having technology skills alone is not sufficient to promote true integration of technology to teachers in a way that transforms instruction; it is critical to understand educational theory and pedagogy. Depending on my team members, and trusting their educational experience to help design instructionally appropriate lessons infused with differentiation opportunities through technology, led to the development of much better lessons than I could ever have created alone.
Although I have always had an open mind and a positive attitude regarding teaching with technology and using “digital native” tools, during this course my attitude toward student assessment changed. I never thought of a video game as a constant, real-time, ongoing assessment with immediate feedback on performance after each task (Solomon, G., & Schrum, L.2007), and will now look at educational applications of game-like technologies differently. I am now convinced that assessment must be frequent, and just as in a video game, there must be regular, ongoing opportunities for students to monitor their progress and connect the effort they expend to their performance and progress.

 In summation, the lessons I learned in the Teaching with Technology class have changed my attitude towards instructional applications for video gaming technology strategies, improved my online leadership and collaboration skills, and left me with a new respect for teachers who have to find innovative methods to deal with such a wide variety of student skill levels and abilities.


Citation: Solomon, G., & Schrum, L. (2007). Web 2.0: New tools, new schools. Eugene, OR: International Society for Technology in Education, 168-176.

EDLD 5364- Week 5 Post Conference

After viewing the archive of this weeks web conference, I was made aware of what the week 5 expectations are. Usually I scan over the expected assignments and readings before viewing the conference, but this week I did not. The web conference really laid out what I needed to do to wrap up the group website, and my individual task. It also reminded me that there was a Tk20 submission and what the due date was.

EDLD 5364- What I learned Week 5

This week I was taken back by the readings for new technology in the schools. I really experienced an epiphany when I read about new types of assessments in the classroom. I had never thought of video game and application type assessments to monitor the on-going progress of students. This type of assessment can offer varied levels and immediate feedback to the students and teachers. The challenge with this type of assessment is finding or creating one that is rigorous and monitors their progress over time.

Sunday, March 24, 2013

EDLD 5364- What I learned Week 4

This week I had an epiphany regarding assessments after our Week 4 readings. As we trek closer to the STAAR exam, this reading was really appropriate for me. Ultimately, the biggest lesson I learned this week in my Teaching with Technology class is that we must always remember that assessment must be used to evaluate ourselves as teachers, and our teaching methods, just as much as it is used to evaluate student learning. By changing the way we assess our students so that we are truly assessing their knowledge and skills and not just their test-taking ability, we gain a better understanding of how to improve them and how to improve ourselves as well. We must remember that we are all learners, we must learn with our students, and we can build relationships by sharing with them the excitement of creating new knowledge that is self-assessing as the lessons progress.


EDLD 5364- Post Conference Week 4

This week's s conference was more confusing to me. After viewing the archived conference I still was unsure if our group must  complete the examples or if we are simply expressing how we would implement technology activities to solve the scenario. One of my group mates emailed our instructional associate, so hopefully that will clear up my confusion. I think there is a chance that I may be making this more confusing by OVER analyzing the instructions.