Action Research final reflection

The final thing we looked at in the course was different ways to asses the quality of our research from Dana (2009).  There are four indicators that assess the quality of your research. The first is Context of Study.  This indicator has the researcher look at what context their study will take place in (p. 179).  When I look at my action research plan, I need to consider the context of study.  My teaching setting is at as Residential Treatment Center.  These students will have different issues from the regular classroom.  I need to understand that students bring in many issues to the classroom and I need to have an aspect of my study that asks the question what was bothering you before you came into class.  The second is Wondering and Purpose.  This indicator seeks to find the root of your question (p. 180).  Why do I want to research this topic and what is its purpose?  I asked myself this question and answered that this is important to instruction and student success.  The third indicator is Principal Research Design.  This indicator collects research from multiple sources (p.181).  My research plan called for just my data in my classroom.  My study could be improved if I asked other teachers to complete the same study and compile the results.  Indicator number four is Principal-Researcher Learning. This indicator seeks to make sure all statements are supported by data (p. 182).  If I claim that my research is successful, what data backs up my statement?  This will improve my research because I will use the data to make my statements about my research, even if the data is not what I expected.  The final indicator is Implications for Practice.  This indicator talks about what changes will be put into practice after my research is finished.  For example, if the trouble shooter form is ineffective, what practices will be put into place to fix it?  By asking myself these questions, I will be able to improve the quality of my action research plan.

Reference:

Dana, N.F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action      researcher.  Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Action Research Week Four Reflection

In week four of Action Research, we had to research three strategies for implementing change from Harris (2009).  I learned from this reading seven steps to conduct a Force Field Analysis.  These steps include, “describing the situation and how you want to change it, what will happen if no change occurs, identify the forces driving and resisting the change, determining if change is viable and what is needed to implement the change” (p. 95).  I learned the Delphi Method is a good way to get multiple perspectives on an issue.  When a problem arises, a leader will ask the members of the group to identify possible solutions to the issue.  When responses are collected, the leader summarizes the responses and distributes them to the group.  The group can then add or amend ideas and resubmit them.  The leader then re-summarizes the results and has the group rank the solutions to the issue (p. 96).  I learned that this is a five step process done in small group or faculty meetings.  The leader asks the group to write down problems or issues with the topic with no discussion. Then, the group breaks up into smaller groups and shares their issues.  The leader then writes these issues down and asks the group to rate the problems (p. 96).  This seems very similar to the Delphi Method with the ranking system.  I could use Nominal Group Technique to identify the behavioral issues that disrupt class the most.                 

Reference:

Harris, S., Edmonson, S., & Combs, J. (2009).  Examining what we do to improve our schools: 9 steps from analysis to action. Larchmont, N.Y.: Eye on Education.

Action Research Plan and Reflection on Week 3

This week in EDLD 5301 Research, we developed an action research plan.  My plan is to see how the process of using a trouble shooter form impacts student behavior and disruptions in the classroom.  This week was helpful in identifying the steps necessary to complete the action research plan.

Action Research Project Plan

Goal:  To see how the process of using a trouble shooter form impacts student behavior and disruptions in the classroom.

Action Step(s)	Person(s) Responsible	Timeline: Start/End	Needed Resources	Evaluation
1. Setting the Foundation: Identifying the research question and proposing the plan for research.	Robinson, Site Supervisor	Start: August 22nd End: August  26th	Meetings with Site Supervisor.	Completion of the draft topic and plan.
2. Analyzing the Data: Review of existing literature to identify effective action research plans.	Robinson	Start: August 26th End: September 2nd	Text: Leading with Passion and Knowledge and Examining What We Do To Improve Our Schools.	Examples and strategies are found.
3. Developing Deeper Understanding: Determine which of the identified strategies can be implemented in my school environment.	Robinson	Start: September 6th  End: September 16th.	Text: Leading with Passion and Knowledge and Examining What We Do To Improve Our Schools.	Pros and Cons identified and each identified strategy is considered.
4. Engaging in Self-Reflection: Using blog posts to reflect on questions that arise surrounding the question and results during the research process	Robinson	Start: August 22nd End: October 7th	Blog site.	Regular reflection postings to my blog.
5. Exploring Programmatic Patterns: Discuss action research strategies with supervisor.  Compile information on student outbursts.	Robinson, Site Supervisor	Start: September 6th End: October 7th	Meetings with Site Supervisor.	Continue to meet with Site Supervisor.  Conduct research on student disruptions.
6. Determining Direction: Research question is clear? Strategies to be used are agreed upon? Time for training sessions is available? Valid surveys and data collection methods have been chosen to determine effectiveness of trouble shooter form.	Self, Site Supervisor	Start: September 5th End: September 16th.	Form to tally student disruptions in each class..	Total disruptions in a two week period.
7. Taking Action for School Improvement: Implementation of trouble shooter form.  Formative evaluation of effectiveness of form. Summative evaluation of the project and results.	Robinson	Start: September 16th End: September 30th	Trouble shooter form.  Form to tally student disruptions in each class.	Total disruptions in a two week period with the trouble shooter form.
8. Sustain Improvement: Share results with faculty, professors, and classmates. Continue to use trouble shooter form if successful.  Consider revision of form if unsuccessful.	Robinson	Start: October 3rd End: October 7th.	None	Compare the two results from before and after the trouble shooter form to see if student disruptions increased, decreased, or stayed the same.