Blog Post #1

I have chosen to write about the area of Educator Preparation and Development. This was a weak area at my campus. I think schools struggle with this because some veteran teachers may be resistant to or confused about how to make the changes necessary to meet the technology needs of today's technology savvy students. To bring this about, colleges and universities are now providing educator preparation programs which provide instruction in current technology integration strategies in all curriculum areas. Teachers also learn how to use technology as a flexible tool to create collaborative and interactive learning environments customized to the students in their classrooms. To aid in these efforts, the SBEC provides Technology Applications Standards. The TEA also provides Technology TEKS to guide teachers in developing engaging technology application lessons. Local districts routinely offer professional development in the area of technology as an ongoing means of increasing student achievement through the use of technology. Federal mandates require that all states develop strategies for a comprehensive plan to help students learn through the use of technology. Trends indicate that progress has been made in this area. At the local level, faculties are using the STaR chart, professional develoopment, online learning, and campus mentoring and coaching to help teachers focus on the technology objectives set forth at the state and local level. At the state level, we have developed the Texas Long-Range Plan for Technology. This is another tool for campuses to use to increase technology applications in the classroom. At the national level, states are monitored in their success toward meeting the goals of their technology plans. I would recommend that improvements be made in the area of providing the tools necesary to implement the technology goals. Teachers need access to promethian boards, projectors, document cameras, laptops, and current software to help students achieve in all subject areas through the use of technology. This can be done by campuses including such expenditures in their CIP's and by districts providing equal funding to campuses throughout their districts. States can help in this effort by ensuring appropriate funding to districts to make such expenditures possible. This effort can also be assisted through Federal funding programs such as Title 1 for schools with significant percentages of low SES students.

Testing

Testing 1, 2, 3.... :-)

End-of-Course Thoughts

This has been one of the most interesting courses of the program for me. I have been fascinated with the new concept I now have about research. I had previously thought of research in terms of articles and data sent out in formal publications by university researchers. In this course I learned to think of research in a completely different way. I now know that research can, and should, be done at the campus level by administrators and teachers who actually know the issues and concerns of the school (Dana 2010 p. 4).
Furthermore, I learned that sources of data for research can consist of less formal and traditional types of “data” such as surveys, interviews, field notes, teacher feedback, and work samples (Dana 2010, p. 181).
One of the highlights of the course for me was learning to create a blog. I now have fellow students following my blog to learn about my ongoing research project. In addition, I have the privilege of following the research developments of my classmates by reading and responding to their blogs.
I learned about several strategies for sustaining improvement. One such strategy is a tool known as Force Field Analysis. This consists of seven steps for a district to work through in order to determine if change is needed. The steps are a series of questions ranging from describing the current situation and any proposed changes to deciding if change is viable and what steps would be needed for implementation (Harris, S., Edmonson, S., Combs, J. 2010, p. 94). Another tool I learned about is the Delphi Method, in which a series of questionnaires is sent out to those who would be affected by the decision (Harris, S., Edmonson, S., Combs, J. 2010, p. 95). Another strategy for sustaining improvement is the Nominal Group Technique. In this process, small groups determine and prioritize needs. My campus used both the Delphi method and the Nominal Group Process last year in our first year as a new campus.
Perhaps most importantly, I developed an action research plan to use at my campus this school year based upon and inquiry I found relevant to the needs of my students. I am researching a new reading program implemented by my district partway through last school year. It is a Leveled Literacy Intervention program for struggling readers in the primary grades. I am attempting, through my research, to determine if the program is effective and if it may have more far-reaching effects than reading improvement. I will be looking for evidence of growth in reading and in other subject areas as well as behavior, social skills, and confidence. I look forward to conducting my action research project throughout this next school year.

Sources:
Dana, N. (2010). Leading with passion and knowledge: the principal as action researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
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.

Action Research Template

Here is my research template. Scroll down.

Action Steps Person(s) Responsible Timeline: Start/End Needed Resources Evaluation 1.Disseminate TPRI scores. Renee Cook Sept. 2010, Jan. 2011, May 2011 TPRI Kits and Palm Pilots for each teacher Students will be ranked from highest to lowest, based on a compilation of TPRI benchmark scores. 2.Select lowest-performing 3 to 4 students per classroom,based on TPRI scores. First Grade Teachers Sept. 2010, Jan. 2011, May 2011 TPRI scores The lowest performing 3 to 4 students will be instructed using Leveled Literacy Intervention. 3.Begin LLI instruction with selected groups. First Grade Teachers Sept. 2010 LLI kit for each teacher/Teacher notes and observation from LLI instruction. Informal teacher observation, student reading level on LLI books. 4. Determine whether students’ reading skills are improving as a result of LLI. First Grade Teachers/Renee Cook/Jen Martin Sept. 2010- May 2011 TPRI, Rigby, Dolch, LLI reading level throughout year/PLC meetings to discuss findings. Teachers and administrators will view TPRI, Rigby, Dolch, and LLI results to assess whether reading improvement was made with LLI and whether it should be continued. 5.Look for growth in other areas such as other academic subjects, behavior, or social skills, or confidence to see if reading improvement may have led to other improvements. First Grade Teachers, Renee Cook, Jen Martin Sept. 2010- May 2011 Grades, informal teacher observation. Additionally, teachers will need PLC meeting opportunity to discuss findings. Teachers and administrators will determine if there were any other areas of growth noted among LLI participants.

Action Research Template

I was not able to copy my plan in the correct format. This is the most readable version I managed to accomplish. I hope this makes sense. Please see my previous post for a description of the plan.


1.Disseminate TPRI scores.
Renee Cook
Sept. 2010,
Jan. 2011,
May 2011
TPRI Kits and Palm Pilots for each teacher
Students will be ranked from highest to lowest, based on a compilation of TPRI benchmark scores.
2.Select lowest-performing 3 to 4 students per classroom,based on TPRI scores.
First Grade Teachers
Sept. 2010,
Jan. 2011,
May 2011
TPRI scores
The lowest performing 3 to 4 students will be instructed using Leveled Literacy Intervention.
3.Begin LLI instruction with selected groups.
First Grade Teachers
Sept. 2010
LLI kit for each teacher/Teacher notes and observation from LLI instruction.
Informal teacher observation, student reading level on LLI books.
4. Determine whether students’ reading skills are improving as a result of LLI.
First Grade Teachers/Renee Cook/Jen Martin
Sept. 2010-
May 2011
TPRI, Rigby, Dolch, LLI reading level throughout year/PLC meetings to discuss findings.
Teachers and administrators will view TPRI, Rigby, Dolch, and LLI results to assess whether reading improvement was made with LLI and whether it should be continued.
5.Look for growth in other areas such as other academic subjects, behavior, or social skills, or confidence to see if reading improvement may have led to other improvements.
First Grade Teachers,
Renee Cook,
Jen Martin
Sept. 2010-
May 2011
Grades, informal teacher observation.
Additionally, teachers will need PLC meeting opportunity to discuss findings.
Teachers and administrators will determine if there were any other areas of growth noted among LLI participants.

My Action Research Plan

I have settled on a new action research topic. I thought about how I could really make the research part of my existing situation like the Dana text suggested. With this in mind I am focusing my research on a Leveled Literacy Intervention program that my district purchased last year. We only received training and materials partway through the school year so we didn't have a full year of assessment data. However, as I think back I remember many such programs which were purchased in the past only to fall by the wayside in a few short years. Here is my inquiry question. In what ways can struggling first grade readers benefit from consistent Leveled Literacy Intervention instruction? This program is really designed for the severely struggling readers who often may wind up being retained. As a result it is crucial to be able to reach them.

My campus takes our beginning-of-year TPRI results and ranks students from highest to lowest based on a compilation of TPRI data. Each teacher will identify the three or four lowest performing students based on this assessment data. These will be the students who will receive LLI instruction. As a grade level, along with our administrators, we will monitor these students throughout the year based on the TPRI results as well as Rigby running records and Dolch sight words. Additional data will be the LLI reading level. The LLI groups may be fluid based on progress. If a student improves to the point of reading on grade level he or she may be exited from the program and another student may receive LLI instruction.

At the end of the year we will assess whether students tended to make reading improvements across the board in reading. Additionally, we will discuss during PLC meetings whether we found any other areas of improvement among participants. We will look for growth in other academic subjects, behavior, social skills, confidence, etc. Some of this will be based on data such as grades. For other areas we will use informal teacher observation to determine growth or progress.

I initially thought I would pursue, through action research, the study of what effect, if any, teacher experience has on student achievement. This topic is something that I am very curious about. However, I think for the purposes of this course I am going to focus on using action research to explore possibilities for expanding our current Accelerated Reading Instruction program. Since the current program, in conjuction with our guided reading, results in one hour and 45 minutes of instructional time being spent with the teacher providing small group instruction (4 days a week), I would like to expand the program to involve more adults in the form of parent volunteers and soldier volunteers from our Adopt-a-Unit. The problem with our current system is that we focus most of our efforts on struggling students. As a result, high-achieving students have much fewer interactions with adults during the course of their day than do low-achieving students. I understand that in order to receive the desired AEIS ratings, we have to focus on getting the low-achieving students on grade level. I am saddened that in the process of doing so, we often ignore our high-achieving students. They wind up working independently or in unattended small groups so that teachers can spend inordinate amounts of time with struggling students. I think this particularly bothers me as a parent of high-achieving students. I believe that our educational system should meet the needs of all students, not just those who perform below grade level. High-achieving students deserve adult interactions as much as low-achieving students.