Action
Research Plan
|
||||
Goal: Increase
student learning and engagement through the use of Promethean Boards in the
English language arts classroom.
|
||||
Action Steps(s):
|
Person(s) Responsible:
|
Timeline: Start/End
|
Needed Resources
|
Evaluation
|
Obtain permission from site
supervisor to conduct research
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
July 22, 2013-
July 26, 2013
|
Site supervisor letter of permission
|
Letter of permission
|
Participate in Promethean Activinstruction
training |
Rosemary Grimm
|
August 5, 2013-August 8, 2013
|
Promethean technology, Promethean
manual,
conversations with teaching and
learning consultants
|
Documentation of resources and tools
available through Promethean
|
Research articles and studies
related to the effectiveness of Interactive White Boards on student learning
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
September 2013
|
Articles, journals, and studies
related to Promethean Boards or Interactive White Boards (IWBs)
|
Notes on research
|
Give parents consent letters for
participation in research group
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
October 2013
|
Sample parent consent letter
|
Consent letter
|
Use parent consent letters to
determine participants
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
October 2013
|
Signed consent letters
|
Compile consent letters and create a
list of participants in two classes (Class A and B)
|
Create a survey to determine
students’ experience with Promethean Boards
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
October 2013
|
Website: Survey Monkey
|
Surveys
|
Give survey to students
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
October 2013
|
Online survey, computers
|
Compile and analyze survey results
as qualitative data. Results show experience with interactive learning with
Promethean Boards
|
Develop ELA lessons that are interactive and utilize
Promethean technology
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
November 2013
|
Promethean resources, interactive websites,
flip charts and tools, Common Core Curriculum
|
IWB technology lesson plans
|
Develop ELA lessons using traditional
teaching strategies
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
November 2013
|
Workbooks, notes, outlines,
worksheets
|
Traditional instruction lesson plans
|
Develop assessments
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
November 2013
|
Computer, curriculum assessments and
task examples
|
Quizzes and performance task
|
Present instruction to participants
in classes A and B
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
December 2013
|
Promethean Board, flip charts, interactive
lessons, notes, outlines, and worksheets
|
documentation of student engagement and
instruction reflection
|
Give Assessments to classes A and B
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
December 2013
|
Assessments and quizzes
|
Assessment results for analysis
|
Data analysis and comparison
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
January 2014
|
Test results, jpams assessment
graphs
|
Quantitative data: Data results and comparisons
|
Write final action research report
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
February 2014
|
Surveys, consent forms, participant
list, lesson plans, reflection notes, assessments, data, graphs and charts
|
Action research report with
conclusion
|
Share results with teachers, site
supervisor, and technology coordinator
|
Rosemary Grimm
|
April 2014
|
Results and final report from action
research
|
Feedback from teachers, site
supervisor, and technology coordinator
|
Format based on Tool 7.1
from Examining What We Do to Improve Our
Schools
(Harris, Edmonson, and Combs, 2010)
Are you using your classes only? Are you just going to compare one lesson? I would suggest comparing three. I would also suggest doing research on four classes -- two interactive and two regular groups. I don't think your sample will be large enough with just two classes and one lesson.
ReplyDeleteYou could also try flipping the groups. For example for groups A and B you do 3 interactive lessons. Then you do three regular lessons. Then do the same thing for groups C and D. This helps eliminate skewed data if one of the classes is honors or has more experience with technology.
What resources are you using for the interactive ELA lessons? What happens if you can't find anything?
I agree with Sarah. You need to use the board for a longer period of time in some classes and leave the other classes without the board. Also, how are you measuring student engagement? If you are using a survey, maybe you need to do some direct observation also. How are you going to measure student learning? I see you are going to give assessments at the end. Are you giving a pre-project assessment as well? If you don't do a before and after assessment, how can you tell that the growth is based on the use of the board.
ReplyDeleteAlso, will the lessons have lots of student interaction at the board, or will the teacher mainly be using the technology? I went to an interesting seminar at ISTE and the leader gave an interesting statistic that even with whiteboards in the room, most technology is used 85% of the time by teachers, not students. If the students are not interacting with the board, can you say they are "using" technology? Just some things to think about. Good luck with this. I love my SmartBoard.
Kathleen, I agree that most of the time IWBs are used by the teacher, which is what I plan to address in my conclusion. I'm using assessments to measure learning. I'm not doing a before and after assessment because I'm comparing class to class. Thanks for the feedback.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very detailed action plan (makes me think I need to add more specifics to my own ARP!) You have really thought out the process thoroughly. I especially like that you have included professional reading as part of your plan to ensure that you get the best activities for instruction. I noticed that you have some qualitative data - observing student engagement, but you might consider getting some qualitative data specifically from the students as well. Give them a survey to share what they liked or didn't like about using the Smart board. Just a thought, but I bet they would be excited to contribute to their teacher's research project!
ReplyDelete