Writing Plan
By Vince | February 12, 2008
The week after the break I’ll be implementing for the entire week. I think that I can make good use of my time from now until then by beginning to synthesize and write my literature review. I’ve already been searching, reading a lot and making notes. I sort of have a very rough first draft in place now. I’m hopeful that I can have a second draft in place by the end of next week. The following week I implement, collect data and write about that as I do it, synthesizing at the end of each day and writing as I reflect daily and begin to study data. By the end of that week, the last week of Feb, I would like be writing the third draft, where I’ll continue to refine the lit review and incorporate the data analysis into the paper also. I’m hoping then that I’ll have the third draft ready for class on March 4th. Of course, this looks great on paper. Now to put it into practice…
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
My Project Begins This Week!
By Vince | February 10, 2008
This week, I’ll be starting my project. I’m hesitant to say that I’ve decided what I’m going to do, because I’ve realized throughout this whole process that it is constantly ever-changing.
For the past few days, I’ve been questioning whether my project will be focusing on increased/changed student engagement, or simply engagement. I think that it will be difficult to address increased student engagement without assessing engagement prior to the innovation being implemented. How can I ever really know, or be lucky enough to come close to knowing, that engagement has somehow been changed if I don’t assess engagement both before and after implementation? At least for the moment, I have decided to study whether or not discrepant events influence student engagement.
But, am I looking for whether or not discrepant events influence student engagement, or whether or not they impact engagement? The wording seems to be critical, but am I being too particular here?
If this is my question, do I need to present the discrepant event to one class and not the other, as I was considering. I think the only reason I would want to do this would be to investigate some perceived change between the two classes in observed engagement. But, is this necessary if I’m not looking for increased engagement?
Even though I’m still having many questions at this stage in my project, they have provided me an incredible learning experience. Attempting this project has provided me with a fantastic background and foundation to start thinking about the action research project I’ll have to do for my dissertation. I’m grateful for having the opportunity to engage in this process and learn from it now. I’m also humbled by what I’ve learned about the process, beginning to understand the scope of what it really entails and acknowledging that there is so much more that I am unaware of, or don’t understand even at this point. I’m very excited to move forward.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
The Time is Finally Here, Yet More Questions…
By Vince | February 10, 2008
This was written 2/8/08 into a Word document and posted two days later:
It seems like it would be easier to assess “learning” rather than student engagement through quantitative methods. I think that it is going to be critical to list the characteristics of “engagement”. I need to list the criteria that I feel demonstrate engagement. What do I think it means to be “engaged”? I’ll need to list observational criteria to know when an increase in engagement has occurred, so that I know when I see it in the classroom, especially since I’ll be using observation as one component to my assessment.
Should I be looking for an increase in engagement, or observing simple engagement? If my question is “Do discrepant events influence student engagement?” can I just look for signs of engagement, or am I trying to recognize signs of an increase, or change, in student engagement. Is it important to know that the discrepant event is associated with some change in engagement? I think the answer is really in the way I address my question. What exactly is it that I’m looking for? I need to be sure that I’ve focused my question enough so that it targets only one of these inquiries.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Thoughts from class
By Vince | February 10, 2008
From class on 2/5/08:
Normally, I write in Word and copy it as a post. I’ve done this ever since losing an entire post that I was writing directly into the blog. In class, on 2/5/08, I blogged in Word but forgot to paste it into my site. Here it is:
It would be nice to begin to collect some preliminary data, or to engage in a “practice run”, before the actual project, but does that impact the data collected from the project if the students have been exposed to the experience, even if not exactly as it would be presented during the project? Does this affect the integrity of the data, or even the experience as authentic for the student? The benefits to a trial run include learning of potential problems and becoming aware of additional/alternative ideas for data collection. Currently, I’m thinking that I’m not going to take a chance in “tainting” my project. Hopefully, I’ll learn of these things during the project, informing me for subsequent studies.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Should I focus my question like this?
By Vince | February 4, 2008
As in my last post, I’m still thinking of simplifying my question to “Do discrepant events influence/affect student engagement?” (see the post from 2/3/08) If I did this, I would still employ my two different back to back classes. I would teach the same lesson to each class, but only one class would get the discrepant event. I could do this a few times, alternating the class that I would be presented the discrepant event. Then I could compare the two classes. Is there a difference in student engagement when a lesson is taught implementing a discrepant event? I really like the way this approach sounds, but I’d really like to hear what others might think. Looking for advice/suggestions!?
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Still trying to narrow that focus…
By Vince | February 3, 2008
I would really like to simplify my question even more, but I’m not sure if I should continue to follow that instinct. I would think that it’s possible to narrow the focus too much. I don’t want to do that. At the same time, I want a question that will provide as much focus as possible when I actually carry the project out. So I’m at a bit of a quandary. How do you know when your question is as “streamlined” as necessary? How do you know when your question has been sculpted and honed to offer the best results for your project? For example, I could ask “Do discrepant events influence/affect student engagement?” It would eliminate the need to present them both before and after the concepts being introduced. Following this project I could investigate the placement of the discrepant event. It almost seems to be logical to do it in that successive order. What do you think?
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
My project continues to take shape
By Vince | February 2, 2008
This week my student teacher moved on to her next position. Now, I’m capable of moving ahead with my project. I have two classes that get the same instruction in back to back periods. I think this might benefit me. I’m still thinking of using the question: “How does the presentation of discrepant events before and after the introduction of a concept within the curriculum impact student engagement?” I have a couple of ideas and I’m not sure which would be the best. One idea is to present a discrepant event before and after the introduction to a topic for both classes. The other idea is to present a discrepant event before a topic for the first class, but not the second class with the intent of comparing the two results and data. Then, present a discrepant event after a topic for the first class, but not the second. Again, I would compare the two. The question is: is it more valuable for me to compare classes with/without the intervention, or is it more valuable to use the same intervention on two different classes so that I can look for consistent data? Another benefit of my class schedule is that it doesn’t really give students in the first class time to talk to fellow students about the discrepant events they’ve experienced.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
Is my project actually taking shape?
By Vince | January 21, 2008
I still think that the direction I outlined in my last post is a great one, but I’m wondering if it might be appropriate for my dissertation project. If I conduct the project this semester, it might provide a deeper understanding of the process, with suggestions to improve the next time I do it, pitfalls to avoid, things to change and keep, etc. I think that it would be great to engage in the entire project as described, in an attempt to show a possible link between engagement and learning. See my previous post where I describe my ideas and offer my thoughts on the project itself at http://www.getrealscience.com/teachervincem/?p=30
Additionally to my previous post is the idea that maybe I could do this for a couple of different topics, reinforcing the results from the data.
After banging my head against a wall for so long about how to even begin formulating an idea for my dissertation, it seems really strange to finally at least have an idea that I THINK might work. Of course, it might not turn out to be something that is worth pursuing, but it definitely is exciting to think that it MIGHT work! I’m sure that there’s lots that I’m missing, and need to add, strengthen, research, discuss with those experienced, but I’m ready!
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
My Question Continues To Be Refined
By Vince | January 19, 2008
I know, I know, I’ve been so busy commenting on other people’s blogs that I’ve been neglecting my own. Balance is something I continue to work at.
Right now, I have a student teacher. She’ll be with me until the end of January. She has full control of the classes, and so I’ll have to wait until then before I can actually get in front of my students and begin to implement an intervention for my action research. I would really love to get in there and pilot a couple of ideas too. In the meantime, I am developing my data collection instruments. I’m also continuing to hone my research question.
I think that I can make my question more focused. I think that I’m still too spread out. In looking more deeply at the structure of my three questions I’m realizing that in order to answer them, I’d have to study many, many different variables. I have narrowed the focus from “learning” to “engagement”, which I think has made a significant difference. Each of the three questions studies the way that “greatest student achievement” can be attained. This is a great direction for me, but it’s not tight enough.
With respect to achieving the “greatest student achievement”:
My first question asks how discrepant event presentations can be structured in order to achieve the greatest impact. The problem with the structure of this question, that I’m now seeing, is that in order to answer this, I’d have to study every possible structure to know which has the greatest impact. With this question, I think it might be better to ask how a particular presentational structure impacts engagement. With this direction, I’m not looking at which presentation produces the greatest impact, but rather how a particular presentation impacts engagement. This seems much more focused and simplistic. Thinking long term, if I continued to do a series of these studies, each one focusing on a different particular presentational structure, I could begin to compile collective data that I could eventually study to answer my initial larger question: how can discrepant event presentations be structured to achieve the greatest impact on student engagement?
My second question asks what characteristics of discrepant events produce the greatest impact. Again, it seems that I would have to study all characteristics of discrepant events in order to answer this question. It makes more sense to me now to select, and study, one particular characteristic. And, just as in the previous question, rather than ask how it would result in the greatest student engagement, I think I should be asking how it impacts engagement.
My third question asks what characteristics of the presentational strategies achieve the greatest impact. I find this question even more complicating than the previous two. I believe it is a valid question. I think that it looks at my first question at a deeper level. But, I think looking this deep would be too complicating at this point and it makes more sense to answer the first question before examining this one.
To sum, I think that the third question is one which should wait until I pursue question number one. My first and second questions examine two completely different things. The first focuses on presentation, the second on the discrepant event itself. Furthermore, the first question has a wider scope than the second.
There are many variables that can be studied within presentational structure. One of those is the difference between a DE before intro to the topic vs after the topic is complete. Once you know which presentational structure produces the most engagement, then you can take the next step: use that structure in a new topic (before or after topic, whichever you have found to produce the most engagement) and examine whether or not learning is taking place within that structure. That would offer significant support for that particular presentational structure. Furthermore, could this be taken to the next level, developing a link between engagement and learning?
This is where I think I’m going. Perhaps, the question should be: “How does the presentation of discrepant events before and after the introduction of a concept within the curriculum impact student engagement?”
This is good stuff! The question may not be perfect yet, but I’m definitely much closer. I’m really enjoying my realization of this process. I’m encouraged because all of this demonstrates to me that I am sculpting a series of questions concerning discrepant events that can easily allow me to pursue this topic in great detail in the future.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
My Proposal!
By Vince | January 6, 2008
This was submitted to April through e-mail, but I just realized that I didn’t post it! Oops! Here it is…
Area of focus: The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship of the various presentation strategies of discrepant events and their possible impact on student engagement.
Reconnaissance: Through self-reflection, I plan to explore my current understandings and beliefs of discrepant events and demonstrations. Through literature review, I will investigate the research regarding these activities, with a focus on the development of philosophies and understanding. I’ll be detailing the evidence supporting my belief that this area of focus is important to research, the situation that I wish to change, or improve, and how I think further research might benefit others.
Connection to reform-based science education:
- The project is grounded in constructivist theory, where students are encouraged to offer insight regarding each discrepant event, essentially founded on their own individual background, experiences and cognitive frameworks.
- Social constructivism will also be incorporated in this project as students are encouraged to collaborate.
- Planned strategies for presentation of the discrepant events will address the Nature of Science. This will be accomplished by demonstrating authentic ways in which scientists approach problems and investigations, and aim to help students understand scientific processes, including verification/replication.
- Rather than a traditional classroom environment, the proposed structures of the investigations in this project utilize an inquiry approach, a significant component to reform-based science education.
- Investigations will be creative, using multiple purposes and methods, allowing for multiple ways for students to express themselves and demonstrate understanding.
- Students will create hypotheses, construct and defend arguments, including the ability to consider alternate explanations.
- Explorations will emphasize acquisition of skills and conceptual understanding rather than rote memorization.
- Project will include planning investigations, designing experiments, observing, predicting, collecting, analyzing and interpreting data, communicating results through group and class discussion and written reports.
- Students will understand the tentativeness of science, including subjectivity and societal influences.
- There will be attention to skill based learning, such as processing and problem solving. There will be significant focus directed toward problem solving techniques.
- These activities will cultivate scientific habitus.
- Prior knowledge is assessed.
- Misconceptions are identified and addressed.
Variables:
- Two classes, out of the five that I teach, will receive the discrepant event intervention.
- The presentational strategies, or formats, will be altered in each of the discrepant events used.
- The discrepant events will be demonstrating different concepts taught within the curriculum.
- The discrepant events will be used as both review of concepts already taught, as well as to introduce new concepts to students.
- A discrepant event will be defined as having the following qualities:
a) It will offer a counter-intuitive experience to what would be expected in a particular situation. It will present an unexpected outcome, contrary to what would be predicted. It will conflict with the observers existing cognitive framework (cognitive conflict). b) It can be surprising, startling, paradoxical, amazing, puzzling, bewildering, confounding, strange, unusual, unreal, unconventional, bizarre, novel, eye-opening, shocking and attention-grabbing. c) The discrepant event will leave the observer at a loss to explain what has taken place. The observer’s current model of thinking will be challenged. d) An explanation for the observed phenomena cannot occur without further investigation.
Research Questions:
- How can discrepant event presentations be structured to influence the greatest impact for student engagement?
- What are the characteristics of discrepant events that result in the greatest student engagement?
- What are the characteristics of the presentational strategies that result in the greatest student engagement?
The Intervention: The same discrepant event will be presented in two different ways to determine their effectiveness in affecting engagement or conceptual change. The first method will involve presentation of the discrepant event “formally”. Kids would be aware that they were engaging in a classroom “experience” and that there will be discussion, etc involved. In the second method, the discrepant event will not be “formally” presented. Students will think they are experiencing the discrepant event simply because they “happen to be around it”. I will be studying which presentational strategy is more successful in influencing positive engagement. Four discrepant events will be implemented, each being shown twice. The two classes to be studied are taught directly following each other in the school schedule. Each class will receive “formal” presentation twice and “informal” presentation twice. These presentational strategies will be alternated throughout the discrepant event series.
Action Research Group Membership:
Two other seventh grade science teachers will be asked to observe the eight presentations. These members will be significant, since they teach the same curriculum as I do. Each of these teachers will be asked to observe four presentations. Furthermore, they will each observe two of each style of presentation and they will alternate observations between each other. I’ll be asking that they offer comments on their observations. I may be asking a school administrator to observe one or more of the lessons as well.
Necessary Negotiations:
I’ll need to receive consent from the two group members, and possibly a school administrator, for their involvement in the project. I’ll also discuss this project, including participation of the two group members, with my principal. Furthermore, prior to intervention, I will discuss this project, and its intent, with the students to be studied.
Timeline:
Phase 1: (Aug-Nov) Identify area of focus, review related literature, develop research questions, and reconnaissance.
Phase 2: (Dec-Jan) Investigate related literature deeper, elaborate more and include more detail to the project proposal. Develop data collection instruments.
Phase 3: (Jan-Feb) Data collection instruments will be developed, evaluated and revised. Project proposal will continue to be revised. Continue to develop data collection instruments. Examination of presence and levels of indicators of engagement prior to the intervention as well, so that a comparison can be made during intervention.
Phase 4: (1st two weeks of Feb) Action research is carried out. Data is collected.
Phase 5: (last two weeks of Feb) Data analysis.
Phase 6: (March) Write research report.
Resources:
- Materials necessary for each of the discrepant events (yet to be determined).
- Student surveys.
- Group member observation comments.
Data Collection:
1. Self-observation of students. Outcome measures include:
a) Who is speaking?
b) How often are students speaking? (group and individual)
c) What are students saying? (record significant comments)
d) Noticeable differences in levels of engagement.
e) Behaviors, actions indicating engagement, curiosity and interest (ex: Lean in effect).
f) Are certain words and phrases used by students that indicate engagement, curiosity or interest?
2. Student self-report through interview and survey:
a) “How important was this to you?” b) “Do you feel that you learn from demos?”
c) “HOW did you learn from this demo?”
d) “What approach helped you?”
e) “What part(s) of this demo helped you to learn?”
f) “What characteristic(s) of this demo helped you to learn?”
g) “What characteristic(s), in general, about demos help you to learn?”
3. Observation reports/comments submitted by group members and administrator.
4. Interviews/discussions with group members following each discrepant event.
5. Examination of presence and levels of indicators of engagement prior to the intervention as well, so that a comparison can be made during intervention.
Publication: My intention is to publish my work. I’ll be learning the steps involved throughout this project.
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »