Need help with Capstone

all_files_for_capstone.doc

Home >Mathematics homework help >Need help with Capstone

Running head: Research Implementation Plan 7

October 28

In 1-2 paragraphs, describe your current research question or thesis statement, and how it is relevant to your educational setting.

My current research question involves motivation of students through technology. I want to know if technology 1) increases the motivation for math students in their desire to learn and 2) if they perform better academically with technology integrated into the curriculum. It seems that the first part of my research will be subjective and the second part objective. In my head they blend together nicely as proof-through-research of the advantages (or not) of utilizing technology in teaching mathematics. I have reasons for wanting to gain data on this. Primarily, I believe that the lives of our 21st century students will be inundated with technology for practical use. No longer will technology be used for social networking or game playing. Instead, I anticipate that the future holds uses for technology in business which we currently cannot imagine. The students in my classroom already think in terms of how to use technology not only for simple research, but also in presentations and demonstrations of their knowledge. I know that even at the kindergarten level, the use of computers is becoming more and more popular since set-up time is immediate, colors and shapes are perfect and educational games can be played by two (for a nice interpersonal approach).

A concern about measuring the improved academic performance is that we are using new world technology up against old school testing. I am going to be looking for situations where technology is being used above and beyond arithmetic answers to see how it is being perceived as assisting in the theory and application of mathematics, rather than just doing the mechanics. I am well aware of the standardized tests that my students will face, and that they are not designed for technology assistance. Perhaps I am looking at the next wave of educational improvement. The pendulum swings slowly in education. Preparing my students for their 21st century lives and at the same time preparing them to pass a standardized test from my 20th century life is the challenge I face in my classroom. Through research (with positive results), I like to think that I will be a step ahead when the day comes and technology is properly insinuated into the math curriculum.

November 1

My topic of research is: Are students better motivated and do they perform better academically when allowed to learn mathematics through the use of technology.

1. Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers

J. Zelkowski, J. Gleason, D. C. Cox, & S. Bismarck Vocabulary:

TPACK - The specialized knowledge that teachers require to effectively integrate technology into teaching practices is currently referred to as technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK)

PSTs’ - preservice teachers’ (PSTs’)

TK - Technology Knowledge

CK - Content Knowledge

PK - Pedagogical Knowledge

What is the topic (focus) of the study?

The researchers sought to develop a valid and reliable, content-specific survey with regard to monitoring and assessing the specialized knowledge that teachers require to effectively integrate technology into teaching practices of mathematics (TPACK). The survey specifically looked at preservice secondary mathematics teachers. In other words, the survey helped to determine how well were these preservice teachers were developing their TPACK.

What are the research question(s)?

There were two minor questions answered in the research but the most important question was how best to control the power of technology in the mathematics classroom. The minor questions were what technologies are relevant to the teaching of mathematics and what mathematics can be taught with the addition of technology.

Who are the study participants?

In an effort to maximize available diversity in a sample, data was collected from a variety of secondary mathematics teacher preparation programs across the United States. Diversity included size of institution, type of institution, size of secondary mathematics education program, demographics of student population, experience of faculty teaching program courses, and geographic location. The total number of participants (acceptable surveys) was 294.

How was the study conducted?

The instrument used for collecting the data was a survey. Students in teacher preparation programs completed a survey. The questions were centered around three topics; TK - Technology Knowledge, CK - Content Knowledge, and PK - Pedagogical Knowledge.

What did they find in the end?

The instrument was considered to be reliable and valid. However, since preservice math teachers can be exposed to new ways of thinking during coursework and improve or diminish their sense of self-efficacy, the researchers saw a more holistic result from the research: the study provides an opportunity for programs and educators to understand their learning environment to improve TPACK development in PSMTs

This study was not specifically about what students know, but rather an objective assessment of what they think they know. The participants’ personal beliefs change positively and negatively over time during preservice preparation. This instrument gives researchers and educators the ability to reliably measure these beliefs regarding TPACK and the contributing factors of PK, TK, and CK during preservice preparation programs. Preservice math teachers (PSMTs) can easily be overconfident or lack confidence.

2. Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment

Chris Merrill

What is the topic (focus) of the study?

It is of interest to note whether an integrative approach to teaching and learning technology, mathematics, and science education is valid and worthwhile or leads to improvements in student learning, if there are various barriers at the secondary level which seem to effect the implementation of these integrated approaches, and if there is an effective formal assessment tool to indicate whether students actually experience an improved learning effect due to the integrated format.

What are the research question(s)?

The major questions addressed in this study were:

1. Is there an immediate cognitive learning effect when technology, mathematics, and science education (TMaSe) in integrated in instruction?

2. Do students who are taught with the integrated TMaSe perceive the necessary connections between technology, mathematics, and science content and concepts?

3. Does TMaSe improve over a long-term period through an integrated teaching and learning approach?

Who are the study participants?

The sample was 71 high school students out of 225 enrolled students in a small high school in the United States. The 71 were chosen because they were enrolled in six technology education classes.

How was the study conducted?

There were two groups in the quasi-experimental design. The six classes were randomly assigned to either the experimental (3) or comparison (3) group. Each Monday a pretest was given (63 multiple choice questions and 37 open ended questions). Over a period of two weeks, the experimental groups received the treatment (six different lessons depicting an integrated, hands-on curriculum). Content lessons were identical. The comparison groups received workbook exercises to reinforce the curriculum content. Six different lessons and activities were created and implemented for both groups. Both groups had instruction in addition to activities. The experimental group used a technology based program to reinforce the instructional content and the comparison groups used workbook activities to reinforce the content they were presented. The time and content were identical.

What did they find in the end?

1. The experimental group did not have significantly higher cognitive learning gains.

2. Both groups did experience similar and significant cognitive learning gains.

3. Both the experimental and comparison groups experienced significant gains in the number of terms and phrases that were identified as being completely integrated.

4. The experimental group did not have statistically significant increases in retention two and four weeks after treatment.

5. Both groups continued to exhibit cognitive learning gains at two and four weeks after instruction/treatment.

3. Case Studies of Multidisciplinary Approaches to Integrating Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Robert C. Wicklein and John W. Schell

What is the topic (focus) of the study?

Today’s school curricula use a segregated approach to instructional topics which does not adequately address the how students are to reassemble the topics into a coherent body of knowledge.

What are the research question(s)?

Is the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education the correct direction for education to go, or is it simply a popular idea with little proof of success?

Who are the study participants?

Administrators and teachers from four different high schools in four different states.

How was the study conducted?

Four high school demonstration sites were established in four different states in the mid-western United States. Multidisciplinary teams comprised of teachers from three respective academic disciplines: technology education, science, and mathematics as well as a school administrator and a school counselor were established in each school. Support was in the form of a resource team comprised of teacher educators from the academic areas of technology education, science, and mathematics as well as a state supervisor for technology education. Each site developed its own multidisciplinary curriculum for mathematics, science, and technology education.

What did they find in the end?

Given a state of open-mindedness to integrating math, science and technology curriculum by those who chose curriculum (administration) and those who implement (teachers) it, the student’s motivation to learn can be affected by the integration.

References

Daugherty, Jenny L., Reese, George C. and Merrill, Chris (2010). Trajectories of Mathematics and Technology Education Pointing to Engineering Design, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, (Spring 2010), Vol. 36, Number 1

Merrill, Chris (2001). Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, (Spring 2001), Vol. 38, Number 3

Wicklein, Robert and Schell, John (1995). Case Studies of Multidisciplinary Approaches to Integrating Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, (Spring 1995), Vol. 6, Number 2

Zelkowski, J., Gleason, J., Cox, D. C., & Bismarck, S. (2013). Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers. Journal Of Research On Technology In Education (International Society For Technology In Education), 46(2), 173-206.

November 1

http://www.justanswer.com/expert/qa.aspx?mode=qa&rpt=3500&T=14689172

Need Sunday November 2. Revise your research question or thesis statement to align with new understandings based on your literature review from last week. For example, if your question or statement was originally high level, dealing with a broad intervention such as motivational strategies, you should now be able to narrow your question or statement to describe a more specific approach. Post your revised question or statement to the discussion board along with a brief description of your topic. I will give you the feedback as soon as I get it.

-----------------

http://www.justanswer.com/expert/qa.aspx?mode=qa&rpt=3500&T=14689177

Need Tuesday November 4 If you will be conducting action research (EDGR 698): Based on the various data collection approaches you learned throughout this course, what collection methods do you think will provide you with the most appropriate data to answer your research question? Why are they appropriate? Answer this question in 2-3 well-formed paragraphs.

---------------

http://www.justanswer.com/expert/qa.aspx?mode=qa&rpt=3500&T=14689183

Need Thursday November 6

For your final assignment, you will craft a research implementation plan. This document will describe how you intend to answer your research question or address your thesis statement. In 2-3 pages, describe your implementation plan using the Implementation Plan Template . Support your statements with evidence from the required studies and your research.

Attachment: 2014-11-01_025414_implementation_plan_template.doc

Attachment: 2014-11-01_025623_chapter_13.pdf

November 6

Research Implementation Plan

Insert Your Name Here

Concordia University - Portland

Educational Research Fundamentals for the Consumer

Introduction

Data will be collected through an experiment. Three classes of Algebra will be instructed on the same material over a two week period. Random students will be assigned work on absolute value from khanacademy.org while the other students will use the textbook for the topic of absolute value. Both groups will also be provided identical teacher lecture. There will be two formal formative assessments in the form of quizzes and one formal summative assessment. Scores on the assessments will be compared and analyzed with regard to differences in results.

The research question which is being examined is “does the use of technology improve the reception of mathematical concepts?” A basic assumption is that if the students are more engaged through the use of technology, then their reception will be improved and their assessments of the topic will be higher than student who did not have the additional input of technology. Students will go through the topic on khanacademy.org which provides videos and assessments, explanations and re-teaching.

Data Collection Methods

Data will be strictly quantitative therefore, it will be collected as percents which will then be averaged for the experimental group (with technology) and the non-experimental group (without technology). It is anticipated that if the technology has made a difference in the students’ comprehension of the topic of absolute value then the average percentage for the experimental group will be higher than the average percentage of the non-experimental group.

For the thesis paper, the data collection will expand to include experiments done in other educational settings and will be taken from data compiled by previous researchers on the effects of technology on the study of mathematics or if the use of technology has improved the reception of mathematical ideas.

Topics to be searched are technology in mathematics, technology in science, integrating technology into teaching practices of mathematics, preceptions in technology education, and characteristics which secondary education faculty (mathematics and science) identify with technology education. Keywords are: technology, mathematics, science, and integration.

Implementation Plan

The plan will be implemented as mentioned above in three mathematics classrooms (algebra), over a period of two weeks focused on a specific topic (absolute value) with half of the students utilizing technology assistance from a specific website (khanacademy.org). The data will be gathered from the summative assessment given at the end of the two week period.

Conclusion

Following the analysis of the percentage results of a summative examination, a conclusion will be reached statistically using a Z-test (due to the small sample) as to whether including technology in the teaching of mathematics improves the reception of mathematics as demonstrated through higher percentages on a summative test.

The results of the experiment will be combined with other various similar testings which have been done on this topic to support the thesis “technology improves the students’ ability to learn and retain mathematics.”

References

Berry, R. Q. & Ritz, J. M. (2004). Technology education - A resource for teaching mathematics. The Technology Teacher, 63(8), 20-24.

Daugherty, Michael & Wicklein, Robert Merrill (1993). Mathematics, Science and Technology Teachers’ Perceptions of Technology Education, Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 4, No. 2, Spring 1993

Chris (2001). Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, (Spring 2001), Vol. 38, Number 3

Zelkowski, J., Gleason, J., Cox, D. C., & Bismarck, S. (2013). Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers. Journal of Research On Technology In Education (International Society For Technology In Education), 46(2), 173-206.

November 8

Insert Paper Title Here

Insert Your Name Here

Instructor: Insert Instructor’s Name Here

A Research Report Presented to

The Graduate Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of Masters in Education

Concordia University - Portland

2013

Insert Paper Title Here

Insert a brief introduction here (i.e. your topic, research question/thesis statement, etc.)

Review of the Literature

This is the main section – the review of literature. Focus on your study articles, and reinforce with your other supporting articles. This section provides a synthesis and analysis of the literature, which leads to your conclusions.

Subheading

Organize the literature review with subheadings if appropriate.

Analysis

Analyze the different perspectives from the literature (compare and contrast). Opine these issues and discuss their implications.

Conclusions

State your conclusions from your literature review.

References

Insert your references in APA format here (Please use hanging indent).

November 8

Literature Survey

Belinda Rector

EDGR 601

Dr. Emily Graves

October 31, 2014

Technology and the Increase in Student Reception in Secondary Mathematics

It is of interest to determine whether the inclusion of technology in the teaching of secondary mathematics actually increases the student’s reception of the subject. Research will be done to investigate various approaches which have been made which include technology in the mathematics curriculum.

Review of the Literature

1. Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers

J. Zelkowski, J. Gleason, D. C. Cox, & S. Bismarck

2. Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment

Chris Merrill

3. Case Studies of Multidisciplinary Approaches to Integrating Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Robert C. Wicklein and John W. Schell

Today’s school curricula use a segregated approach to instructional topics which does not adequately address the how students are to reassemble the topics into a coherent body of knowledge.

4. Mathematics, Science, and Technology Teachers’ Perceptions of Technology Education

Michael K. Daugherty & Robert C. Wicklein

The benefit of using technology to advance the teaching of the sciences, mathematics in particular is an idea which has not yet been proven. On the face of the topic, it makes sense that the two would go hand in hand, however, as yet the results have not been positive. Using two groups, one with technology and one without, the students’ have reacted with very little difference insofar as content retention, comprehension and ability to extend the knowledge. This study examines a possible reason for this lack of positive results and looks at the attitudes or perceptions of what characteristics exemplify technology in education. This study was based on a questionnaire sent to teachers of mathematics, science and technology. The questions asked were:

1. What are the characteristics that exemplary technology education classroom teachers identify with technology education?

2. What are the characteristics that associated secondary education faculty (mathematics and science) identify with technology education?

3. Is there a significant difference between the perceptions of the exemplary technology education classroom teachers and the perceptions held by associated secondary education faculty in science and mathematics?

The results of the questionnaire found that those who are using technology education in math and science have widely different ideas as to how the process of improving education can be obtained through technology.

5. Investigating the Relationship between High School Technology Education and Test Scores for Algebra 1 and Geometry

Richard R. Dyer, Philip A. Reed and Robert Q. Berry

As the emphasis continues to be placed on academic outcomes through standardized testing, accountability has become the focal point of education. Whose fault is it? What was done to improve the scores of this school which was not done at this school where the scores showed no improvement? The emphasis on improving student achievement in the core academic areas has led technology educators to try to demonstrate the links between their courses and the core academic areas (Berry & Ritz, 2004). A study was undertaken to compare End of Course mathematics performance of students who completed courses in illustration and design technology to those who had not completed the courses. The research questions asked if those with the extra courses performed better than those who did not have the courses and if the students without the courses did better after taking the courses on retake exams. The answers were yes in both cases. The implications of this study are very important as they have singled out a variable which, on the surface, has little to do with mathematical perceptions.

The researchers imply that the problem with previous studies (and the failure to connect technology with mathematical improvement) lies with the lack of attaching contextual importance of certain mathematical skills. At this time, the two courses of illustration and design technology are not significantly causal, but this was the first study I saw which had definitely positive results connecting technology and mathematical ability.

Analysis

In a search to determine why technology has not made an impact in educational advances in secondary education, various surveys, quasi-experiments and case studies have been undertaken to try to pinpoint the reasons for the lack of growth in student reception of the topics in secondary mathematics. Some studies studied the incoming new teachers, some studied the perceptions or expectations of the secondary teachers who are utilizing technology but not seeing important changes in student reception and others looked at administration to see if the problem was in the reluctance of those in control of the purse strings and curriculum. One more studied the results of using a multidisciplinary approach to integrating the mathematics and science with technology education. Finally, however, the last study considered here has found a possible connection between improvements in score on mathematic standardized testing but not necessarily on the student’s improved reception of the subject. Connecting physical tasks to the mental tasks may show increasing promise.

Conclusions

So far, and I have not given up hope, the answer to whether or not technology improves the reception of mathematics topics in secondary school is not clear. None of the questionnaires, surveys, case studies, quasi-experiments have seen the expected results. And yet, the idea is so basic that it must be true. Integrating technology with the teaching of mathematics simply must be a lynch pin to improved learning. The stumbling block or avenue to success has just not been found.

References

Berry, R. Q. & Ritz, J. M. (2004). Technology education - A resource for teaching mathematics. The Technology Teacher, 63(8), 20-24.

Chris (2001). Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, (Spring 2001), Vol. 38, Number 3

November 8

Technology and the Increase in Student Reception in Secondary Mathematics

Insert Your Name Here

Instructor: Insert Instructor’s Name Here

A Research Report Presented to

The Graduate Program in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements

For the Degree of Masters in Education

Concordia University - Portland

2013

Technology and the Increase in Student Reception in Secondary Mathematics

Review of the Literature

Although there has been surprisingly little research on the topic of utilizing technology in a regular mathematics curriculum, several researchers have explored the incorporation of technology. The results have not demonstrated a positive result when technology is used in mathematics curriculum. Owing to this lack of positive results, research was done to determine if there were other causes which might have altered the expected results. One study was done to examine the attitudes of various members of the education community. The premise was that there are educators who do not wish to add technology to the teaching of mathematics. The idea of improvement resulting from technology has appeared to be so basically intuitive that most educators expect technology to make a large difference in comprehension, application and retention of mathematics. As mentioned, so far this has not been the case.

Several studies have approached this topic from different perspectives. It stands to reason that any teacher who expects to utilize technology in the teaching of secondary mathematics should be well trained in the utilization of the technology from the hardware needed to the software available. A study which was done approached Preservice teachers and looked at the specialized knowledge that they would need to effectively integrate technology into teaching practices of mathematics (TPACK) (Zelkowski et al, Developing and Validating a Reliable TPACK Instrument for Secondary Mathematics Preservice Teachers, 2013). The researchers attempted to make the survey as valid and reliable as possible in order to gather data on the preparedness of our future teachers for using technology to teach mathematics.

Going directly to the heart of the matter, a research question arises from the viewpoint of technology rather than mathematics. It is of interest to note whether technology education students achieve in technology better when their technology education teacher correlates planning and instruction with their science and mathematics teachers. So rather than look just at the mathematics classroom, this approach wanted to blend technology with science and mathematics to see if there was more “drive” created to understand technology if the student can see the usefulness of it with respect to science and mathematics. When the results of this student were not positive, it may be posited that since today’s school curricula uses a segregated approach to instructional topics when an attempt is made to integrate subjects, the students are not “adequately” trained in how to “reassemble the topics into a coherent body of knowledge” (Wicklein and Schell, 1995). There also might be barriers arising in attitudes from stake holders as to whether an “effective formal assessment tool” (Merrill, 2001) exists which can indicate whether students actually experience an improved learning effect due to the integrated format.

First, it needs to be proven that technology is a viable way to advance the teaching of the sciences; mathematics in particular. It can safely be said that large numbers of people assume that using technology in the sciences is a positive way to hasten the learning of mathematics allowing students to “dig deeper” in application. However, there has been very little done in the way of actually proving this to be true. It is intuitive, but not proven. One skeptical study took a look at the perceptions of the teachers of three subjects, mathematics, science and technology to try to determine if there was any difference in being taught by an educator who firmly believes in the technological approach to learning or by an educator who mistrusts the viability of using technology (at this time) to teach conceptual mathematics. Through a questionnaire sent to teachers of mathematics, science and technology the researchers probed for opinions as to the reasonableness of using technology to teach mathematics. What was determined is that those who believe in using technology in teaching and those who do not have widely different ideas as to how the process of improving education can be obtained through technology.

Eventually an investigation was done on standardized tests scores. This is, of course one of the more important reasons for schools to be concerned with the integration of technology in the classroom. The emphasis on improving student achievement in the core academic areas has led technology educators to try to demonstrate the links between their courses and the core academic areas (Berry & Ritz, 2004).

Analysis

Conclusions

So far, the answer to whether or not technology improves the reception of mathematics topics in secondary school is not clear. None of the questionnaires, surveys, case studies, quasi-experiments investigated here have obtained the expected results. And yet, the idea is so basic that it simply must be true. Integrating technology with the teaching of mathematics must be a lynch pin to improved learning. The stumbling block or approach to successfully integrating technology with mathematics has just not been found.

References

Berry, R. Q. & Ritz, J. M. (2004). Technology education - A resource for teaching mathematics. The Technology Teacher, 63(8), 20-24.

Merrill, Chris (2001). Integrated Technology, Mathematics, and Science Education: A Quasi-Experiment, Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, (Spring 2001), Vol. 38, Number 3

November 10

Action Research Project

My chosen area of focus is the improvement in the learning of mathematics through technology. This was chosen because it seems obvious that technology should positively impact the learning of mathematics and because there seem to be two very opposite sides to the question research “does incorporating technology into the mathematics curriculum improve the reception, comprehension and retention of mathematics?”

The use of technology directly impacts how I create my lessons in mathematics and whether or not technology can be is used to further the comprehensibility of a lesson’s content. If it is determined that students excel when allowed to approach a mathematical subject through technology, I will need to further my education about the use of technology in the classroom.

The goal of this project is to find substantiating studies which demonstrate that utilizing technology in the teaching of mathematics allows students to be more receptive to the learning of mathematics. I can experiment with groups of students over a two week period using a single topic to determine if one group does better on a summative assessment than another.

Frankly, I’m not clear how utilizing this approach helps me to understand rather than prove. Doesn’t research in and of itself seek to prove a statement or idea? If the action I take impacts change, something appears to have been proven. I’m not saying empirically proven, just clarified.

November 14

Does incorporating technology into the mathematics curriculum improve the reception, comprehension and retention of mathematics?

My chosen area of focus has been the improvement in the learning of mathematics through technology. This was chosen because it seemed obvious that technology should positively impact the learning of mathematics and because there seem to be two very opposite sides to the question “does incorporating technology into the mathematics curriculum improve the reception, comprehension and retention of mathematics?”

I considered that first the use of technology should directly impact how I create my lessons and did not know whether or not technology could be added to improve the comprehensibility of a lesson’s content. I thought that if it can be determined that students excel when allowed to approach mathematics through technology, then teachers will need to further their education about using technology in planning lessons.

The goal of this project was to find studies which have been done on the use of technology in the teaching of mathematics. I considered that by splitting two groups I could compare and contrast their testing results on a two week mathematics unit.

However, over the course of the past two days I have thought deeply about my question for this Action Research. It seems to me that there are actually three approaches which might meet the criteria I am researching. In the form of questions, the first would be “Does the use of technology improve high school students’ performance on unit tests?” The second research question would be “Can continual review with technology applications improve the ability of mathematics students to utilize mathematical topics?” The third question would be directed at a general math student. It would be “Does the daily use of technology serve to improve the utilization of mathematical applications for a general math student?”

At this point, the second question really attracts my attention because of the fragmented way mathematics is taught. For many years the ideal approach to mathematics was to decompose ideas into “doable” concepts and steps. The problem with this approach which was discovered to be epidemic throughout education was that after decomposing content, there was no follow up conclusion which re-composed the details back into a large idea. According to Wicklein and Schell, “school curricula is a segregated approach to instructional topics which does not adequately address the reassemblage of topics into a coherent body of knowledge” (1995). Although this makes complex subjects such as mathematics more manageable the colossal price we pay is that we can no longer adequately see the long term consequences of mathematical actions. I am sympathetic to the time constraints we must place on our educational units but I wonder whether technology might be one solution to this fragmentation. There has been significant attention paid to integration between school subject areas, but very little attention has been paid to such an idea within the mathematics classroom. The old adage that “mathematics is the queen and servant of science” has caused the area of mathematics to be bereft of meaning in and of itself. Toward that end I believe I can examine whether or not continual review with technology applications will improve the ability to connect mathematical topics.

I believe that I can choose a small idea such as probability and expand it to one of its larger purposes using prior knowledge, recomposition, problem solving skills and higher order thinking. The use of higher order thinking would be a driving force in this approach to recomposing a decomposed topic. Central to advanced learning is the concept of thinking. According to Lauren Resnick (1987), higher order thinking does not depend on algorithms, is complex and may yield multiple solutions. I would like to use her strategy of integrating research into discovering the meaning of mathematics.

In addition, it has long been known that without apparent application, knowledge may not be seen as meaningful and thus not easily transfer to other learning situations. Simply telling students what the application might be is almost as useless as not knowing the application in the first place. The use of technology to activate potential knowledge through discovery is the aim of this action research. I would like to follow a program done in Colorado where technology was used to evaluate problem solutions found without technology with the objective of developing new problems. I find a challenge to be if this is only two weeks, the students may not have the capabilities to discuss topics at deep levels.

I have not found a workable prototype yet, but have several areas and authors which I will be examining over the following days.

References

Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

November 14

image1.emf For teachers and administrators, action research is a user-friendly, practical approach to conducting research.

• What strategy works best to improve reading fluency?

• I saw an interesting graphic organizer in a recent workshop; will it really help my students to be more successful with nonfiction text?

• After examining our grade level’s end-of-year assessment results, we have identified one major area of focus: What is the best method for teaching one-digit multiplication?

160 KAPPA DELTA PI RECORD • SUMMER 2008

These questions are common concerns of K–12 teachers and administrators. More than ever, educators across the United States are held accountable for their students’ learning and subsequent performance on high-stakes tests. Teachers and administrators must be able to identify clearly what techniques are effective at improving student learning, which ones are not, and how to develop a set of successful instructional practices based on that knowledge

(Airasian 2001). Research is not typically something that many K–12 teachers think about as part of their regular planning regimen. Many teachers are so focused on getting through

each day that the mere thought of trying to incorporate research into their professional practice may seem daunting and unrealistic. That may be true for traditional forms of

research driven by quantitative and qualitative data analysis; those types of research commonly are very involved and formal, often taking many months and even years to complete. Sample sizes typically need to be large (particularly with quantitative designs). Results are shared usually in the form of scholarly writing through peer-reviewed journals or in research-focused professional conferences (Mason, Lind, and Marchal 1991).

Action research, on the other hand, presents a more user-friendly, practical approach to conducting research. Using this model, which is generally less formal than other types of research, teachers and building administrators conduct research for one main purpose: to improve teaching and learning (Slavin 2006). Action research can

161

involve a single teacher or a collaborative team of two or more teachers working together to focus on a mutual topic. Action research projects can take on an even larger scope by involving all teachers within a specific grade level, a particular department, or an entire school. Another major difference between the action research model and traditional forms of research is sample size; it is possible to conduct action research with a single student, if necessary. Further, the way results are shared can vary from traditional research. Though sharing results could

involve formal publication in journals or presentations at conferences, reporting might consist of much less formal means such as faculty meetings, professional development workshops, or publication on the school district’s Web site. Moreover, an action research project can span only a few weeks, or it can last an entire school year and beyond.

Identify the Problem

Some basic steps comprise the K–12 action research model (Sagor 2000). First, the teacher/researcher will identify the problem. Problems occur every day at school. A teacher does not have to look far to find them. Examples of problems might include areas such as:

• poor attendance;

• lack of parental involvement;

• writing skills that do not meet grade-level expectations;

• reading comprehension skills that prevent a student or a group of students from passing content-area assessments;

• bullying or aggressive behavior on the playground;

• poor performance on specific mathematics subtests; or

• an entire grade level that scores below expectations on decoding skills.

The process of narrowing down a topic involves looking for patterns in a recurring problem. For example, if a teacher observes a problem once or twice, it may be a concern, but not significant enough to warrant an action research study. If, however, a difficulty lingers, the problem might be a good choice for the focus of an action research study. After the problem is identified, it must be articulated clearly. After stating the problem, the teacher/researcher should be able to answer these questions: How do you know this is a problem? On what are you basing your

belief? What evidence do you have that this is truly a problem worth investigating?

Questions

The next step is the formation of specific researchable questions. Typically, three to five questions are common for most K–12 action research investigations. Constructing the wording of these questions appropriately is important; each question should be as narrow, as specific, and as researchable as possible. Avoid framing questions that are vague; they must be answerable through collection and analysis of data after administering a specific “treatment”

or instructional strategy over a predetermined period. To develop a set of appropriate action research questions, the following elements are necessary: the student population, the desired result, and the specific strategy for achieving the end result.

Here are some examples of questions for consideration for action research investigations with a literacy focus:

• Will students’ desire and attitudes toward reading change if they are shown some kind of success?

• Is it possible for students to incorporate the use of word walls in all areas of their education?

• Will providing my students with daily practice actually help them to achieve success?

• Will implementing the three-cueing system with first- and second-grade Title I Reading students increase flexible reading skills and lead to higher reading levels?

• Do interactive word walls improve the quality of writing journals for kindergarten students?

• Will the use of graphic organizers help improve my tenth-grade students’ performance on social studies unit tests?

Notice the significant difference in the wording among these sample questions. In the first three, the language is ambiguous and confusing. Not all of the three required elements are apparent ( student population, desired result, and specific strategy for achieving the end result) . Achieving a successful action research project would be quite difficult using those questions in their present form. The last three questions, on the other hand, each contain all the information necessary to conduct a successful action research project. Each one clearly identifies on whom the project will focus, the specific intervention, and the ultimate goal.

Now reconsider the first three questions presented earlier to see how some modifications make them more clear and appropriate for action research:

• Will the daily implementation of the “bless the books” strategy improve the reading interest and motivation of second-grade students?

• Does the use of interactive word walls improve the quality of fourth-grade students’ writing samples?

• Will providing my eleventh-grade American Government students with weekly practice using

the Jigsaw strategy elevate their unit assessment performance?

162 KAPPA DELTA PI RECORD • SUMMER 2008

Construction of the research questions is perhaps the most crucial element of planning relative to a successful research design. As questions are being formulated, consider how those questions could be answered. For example, a question that can be answered by consulting a textbook or by reading a journal article is not appropriate for action research. To fit the model

for action research, an actual strategy, technique, or “intervention” intended to elicit change must be implemented for a specified length of time .

Table 1 provides a useful format for planning action research questions. Before generating the wording of questions, clearly identify specific elements of the desired result, how the desired result will be attained, the specific student population, and how the questions could be answered. After drafting this information, the process for writing questions is relatively simple.

Review of Related Literature

After research questions are drafted, the next step is to conduct a review of related literature (Pyrczak 1999). What investigative work on the chosen topic already has been conducted by colleagues respected within the profession? If the research questions already have been

answered, studying them again may be redundant. Many times, reviewing the work of others also provides insight regarding what additional avenues could be explored. Focus of the review should start from a broad scope and gradually become narrower, similar to that of an inverted pyramid. Consider, for example, the research question: Will KWL improve my sixth-grade students’ performance on science and social studies unit tests? A review of literature would begin very broad in scope, perhaps investigating effective teaching practices relative to content areas. The review then would delve into

image2.emf

KAPPA DELTA PI RECORD • SUMMER 2008 163

Also in traditional research, qualitative research designs typically have smaller sample sizes. Data sources tend to be from focus group interviews, questionnaires that contain many open-ended questions, classroom observations, and examination of student portfolios. Researchers also may use descriptive statistics, such as population mean, median, and mode, for analyzing data (Pyrczak 1999).

Action research, in contrast, typically involves sources of data such as teacher observation, examination of student work samples, interest inventories, and performance on either teacher-created assessments or commercially produced instruments. Analysis of data might be completed through some type of coding or through construction of criterion-referenced scoring

guides or rubrics. A model such as “Rubrics for Success” might be appropriate for an action research investigation, particularly if numerical values were assigned to each level of success (Ross-Fisher 2005).

Regardless of which type of research is conducted, a timeframe should be established for carrying out each element. Setting these parameters helps the teacher/researcher to remain organized, focused, and on schedule.

Analysis of the Data

After the problem has been clearly defined, research questions have been framed, the related literature has been reviewed, and data has been collected, the next step is analysis of the data (Strauss and Corbin 1990). As previously mentioned, the use of criterion-referenced rubrics or other types of rating scales usually works well with action research, as do teacher-made tests, observation checklists, and other comparable approaches. Certainly, when larger sample populations are present, using some form of inferential analysis is possible; but formal methods, such as those employed in quantitative designs, are not typical of action research.

Keys to look for in action research investigations are patterns of evidence—trends—over the duration of the study. As a reminder, the underlying premise of action research is to improve teaching and learning.

To accomplish that goal, the teacher/researcher must determine whether and to what extent the intended result is occurring within the context of the specific strategies or techniques employed in the investigation. A common way to ascertain the impact of a technique is to look at the pre- and post-assessment data and compare the two. Has there been growth? If so, how much? If not, how little, and why? What specifics about science and social studies teaching and learning, respectively. Gradually, the review would become more focused on specific instructional strategies; and finally, on KWL specifically.

By the end of the literature review, the researcher should have identified: (1) what other respected sources have written about the topic; and (2) how the planned strategy, technique, or approach for the project shows promise for success. Using the concept of the inverted pyramid, as shown in figure 1, the conclusion of the literature review should practically be “pointing” at the intended strategy.

image3.emf

Methodology

After conducting the review of related literature, the next step is to clearly define what specific methods will be required to answer the research questions. The methodology is important because it must align with what is being asked (Salvia and Ysseldyke 2001). In other words, the “how” must fit with the “what” in the design of the action research study. This element of the action research design states exactly what data will be collected, how it will be collected, and how it will be analyzed.

In traditional forms of quantitative research, large sample sizes are common and standardized test scores often are a primary data source. Many times, researchers attempt to draw comparisons between two or more groups. Specific inferential statistical methods, such as a two-tailed test (otherwise known as a t-test), Spearman’s rank-order correlation coefficient, and analysis-of-variance (ANOVA), are methods commonly used for analyzing data of standardized test scores (Patten 2000; 2001).

164 KAPPA DELTA PI RECORD • SUMMER 2008

are the patterns of evidence that lead to this conclusion? Is this trend applicable to just one student in the group, to specific students, or to the entire class? In short, use the available data to “wring out” as much information as possible. Presenting the data in charts, graphs, or tables is appropriate and useful. After the data has been thoroughly reviewed and analyzed, each research question should have been answered and conclusions should have been drawn. If

they have not, then another data review is necessary. If information still is not available to answer the questions, this may indicate that there was a flaw in the study design and that different data collection methods are necessary (Pyrczak and Bruce 2003).

As with all research designs, action research does have its limitations. For example, if a strategy is used with only one or two students, the effect of that strategy cannot be assumed for the entire class. The duration of an action research project also has an impact on the strength of results; a study conducted for a period of two or three weeks is not as conclusive as one conducted for 10 or 12 weeks. Additionally, one must be careful to isolate the specific strategy being used as the “treatment” during the action research study so that the impact of that strategy can be determined with confidence. For instance, suppose that the desired end result is to improve reading comprehension, and the strategy being used is KWL; however, students also are exposed to other techniques, such as the DRTA and graphic organizers. In this example, it may be difficult to know with certainty which strategy had the greatest impact on improving student comprehension. Therefore, conclusions cannot be drawn with confidence about information that was derived from the data.

Next Steps

After data has been analyzed, research questions have been answered, and conclusions have been drawn, it is time to draft a plan of action for the future and reflect on the experience (Sagor 2000). This process might elicit a change in instructional strategy connected with a particular unit of study, or perhaps a modification in curriculum for a specific skill, or maybe

even a variation of the sequence in which students are presented with certain concepts. A plan of action also could involve recommending ideas for future research by the teacher/researcher or building colleagues.

Reflecting on the entire experience near the end of an action research project is also important. What were specific strengths of the study and why? What were specific weaknesses of the study and why? How does one know? What would one do differently next time if given the chance to repeat the investigation? To engage fully in this type of reflective practice, the teacher/researcher might maintain a daily log or journal that includes not only what took place, but also anecdotal information and additional questions or concerns.

Don’t Forget to Share!

After the entire action research investigation is carried out in its entirety, one last step needs to take place—that of sharing and disseminating what has been learned with colleagues. As mentioned earlier, the primary purpose of action research is to improve teaching and learning, and not just for one classroom exclusively. What a shame it would be for a teacher/researcher to glean insightful information about how best to teach writing, or decoding, or long division,

and then never share that information with others! What are the most effective ways to disseminate what has been learned through action research? Perhaps a faculty meeting after school, a professional development workshop, or an article on the school’s Web site might be appropriate. Presentation at a local, state, or regional conference also might be an option.

A narrated PowerPoint® presentation sent throughout the district via e-mail could be considered. The possibilities are endless.

How educators go about sharing is up to them. The important thing is to let others know what was done and what was learned. Not only will the information allow colleagues to apply findings from the research, but it also may open the door for future collaborative action-research projects that will continue the cycle of improving teaching and learning.

References

Airasian, P. W. 2001. Classroom assessment: Concepts and applications, 4th ed.

Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Mason, R. D., D. A. Lind, and W. G. Marchal. 1991. Statistics: An introduction, 3rd

ed. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Patten, M. L. 2000. Understanding research methods: An overview of the essentials,

2nd ed. Los Angeles: Pyrczak Publishing.

Patten, M. L. 2001. Questionnaire research: A practical guide, 2nd ed. Los Angeles:

Pyrczak Publishing.

Pyrczak, F. 1999. Evaluating research in academic journals. Los Angeles: Pyrczak

Publishing.

Pyrczak, F., and R. R. Bruce. 2003. Writing empirical research reports: A basic guide

for students of the social and behavioral sciences, 4th ed. Los Angeles: Pyrczak

Publishing.

Ross-Fisher, R. L. 2005. Developing effective success rubrics. Kappa Delta Pi

Record 41(3): 131–35.

Sagor, R. 2000. Guiding school improvement with action research. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Salvia, J., and J. E. Ysseldyke. 2001. Assessment, 8th ed. Boston: Houghton

Mifflin.

Slavin, R. E. 2006. Educational psychology: Theory and practice, 8th ed. Boston:

Allyn & Bacon.

Strauss, A. L., and J. Corbin. 1990. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory

procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

November 14

CAPSTONE PROJECT DOCUMENTATION FORM

Action Research is an exciting, disciplined process of discovery designed to integrate theory into one’s daily practice in a way that improves educational practices and the individual conducting the research. Action Research is the Capstone Project in the Master’s of Education program for Concordia University online. It gives the educator, as a scholarly practitioner, the opportunity to examine relevant issues in his or her own classroom or school which may complicate, compromise, or complement the learning process—and to find meaningful, practical, research-based answers.

In Action Research, teachers are empowered to design a research-based plan, identify learning issues or problems, review relevant literature that examines identified problems, implement specific, research-based strategies, and discover convincing evidence that supports or contravenes their teaching strategies. The most exciting part of Action Research is the teacher can often observe student improvement during the project and can demonstrate, in a quantitative manner, the improvement of student learning. Sagor notes, “Seeing students grow is probably the greatest joy educators can experience” (2002, p. 5).

The steps to the Capstone Project are detailed below. Read through all of the steps before creating your implementation plan. Save this form as a draft until all Action Research steps have been completed and all responses are documented. You will submit this form at different stages of completion throughout EDU 698.

ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT
Name:	Insert text here.
Title of Project:	Insert text here.
Date Completed:	Insert text here.
IMPLEMENTATION TIME FRAME:
Number of weeks:	Insert text here.
TIMELINE of ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT:
Start Date:	Insert text here.
End Date:	Insert text here.
AREA OF FOCUS: What is your chosen area of focus? Why did you choose this area? How does it directly impact you? Insert text here.
RESEARCH QUESTION: Insert text here.
DEMOGRAPHICS
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA: Where/What is the research site? Who is directly involved? What statistics will give a clear understanding of the context and culture of the research site? (Do not use name as an identifier.) Provide references for sources used. Insert text here.
TARGET GROUP: Who are the students you are trying to impact? (Do not use names - you must use another identifier.) How do you think this strategy or content focus will benefit the target group? Insert text here.
BASELINE DATA: What are the baseline data that support your choice for this area of focus? What patterns or trends do you see in the data? What is your proof that an issue exists in this focus area? (NOTE: You may not depend solely on Standardized Test Scores.) Insert text here.
ACTION PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: What is your plan to implement the strategy or content knowledge? How did you collaborate with other staff involved with this issue? Insert text here.
PROCEDURES & MEASURES: What are the steps you will follow? How will you measure student progress? Insert text here.
DATA COLLECTION: What data will be collected? How often? What tools will be used? Copies of tools will go in appendixes. Insert text here.
IMPLEMENTATION: (Describe the actual implementation of your plan.)
Week 1: Insert text here.
Week 2: Insert text here.
DOCUMENTATION OF ADJUSTMENTS: How did the plan change during the course of the Action Research timeline? What prompted the change? What were the effects of the changes? Insert text here.
ANALYSIS & REPORTING
REPORTING RESULTS: What are your results and how will you share them? How does the baseline data compare to the ending data? What is the story told by your data? Insert text here.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE: How will the results impact your teaching in the future? How did the project inform your decision-making as a professional? Insert text here.
CONCLUSIONS: Did this study improve student performance? Explain. Did this study improve your skills as a teacher? Explain. Insert text here.
REFERENCES:
Insert text here.
PERSONAL REFLECTIONS:
Insert text here.

November 14

CAPSTONE PROJECT DOCUMENTATION FORM

ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT
Name:	Insert text here.
Title of Project:	Insert text here.
Date Completed:	Insert text here.
IMPLEMENTATION TIME FRAME:
Number of weeks:	Insert text here.
TIMELINE of ACTION RESEARCH PROJECT:
Start Date:	Insert text here.
End Date:	Insert text here.
AREA OF FOCUS: What is your chosen area of focus? Why did you choose this area? How does it directly impact you? Insert text here.
RESEARCH QUESTION: Insert text here.
DEMOGRAPHICS
DEMOGRAPHIC DATA: Where/What is the research site? Who is directly involved? What statistics will give a clear understanding of the context and culture of the research site? (Do not use name as an identifier.) Provide references for sources used. Insert text here.
TARGET GROUP: Who are the students you are trying to impact? (Do not use names - you must use another identifier.) How do you think this strategy or content focus will benefit the target group? Insert text here.
BASELINE DATA: What are the baseline data that support your choice for this area of focus? What patterns or trends do you see in the data? What is your proof that an issue exists in this focus area? (NOTE: You may not depend solely on Standardized Test Scores.) Insert text here.
ACTION PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: What is your plan to implement the strategy or content knowledge? How did you collaborate with other staff involved with this issue? Insert text here.
PROCEDURES & MEASURES: What are the steps you will follow? How will you measure student progress? Insert text here.
DATA COLLECTION: What data will be collected? How often? What tools will be used? Copies of tools will go in appendixes. Insert text here.
IMPLEMENTATION: (Describe the actual implementation of your plan.)
Week 1: Insert text here.
Week 2: Insert text here.
DOCUMENTATION OF ADJUSTMENTS: How did the plan change during the course of the Action Research timeline? What prompted the change? What were the effects of the changes? Insert text here.
ANALYSIS & REPORTING
REPORTING RESULTS: What are your results and how will you share them? How does the baseline data compare to the ending data? What is the story told by your data? Insert text here.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE: How will the results impact your teaching in the future? How did the project inform your decision-making as a professional? Insert text here.
CONCLUSIONS: Did this study improve student performance? Explain. Did this study improve your skills as a teacher? Explain. Insert text here.
REFERENCES:
Insert text here.
PERSONAL REFLECTIONS:
Insert text here.

November 14

image4.emf

	1	2	3
Desired End Results	Higher test scores	Greater Retention	Better Application
Method for Achieving the Desired End Results	Eliminate the need for rote memorization	Connections between applications	Students derive the mathematics needed
Specific Student Population	High School	All grades 3 - high school	General math class
How the Question Could be Answered	Comparison between two groups	Specific questions such as “what would you use to solve”	Asking students what they would use and why
Possible Question	Does the use of technology improve high school students’ performance on unit tests?	Can continual review with technology applications improve the ability of mathematic students to connect topics?	Does the daily use of technology serve to improve the utilization of mathematical applications for a general math student?

�This section should be a synthesis of what you have read and not a list of the articles discussed individually. Also, in-text citations should be used instead of listing the authors below each title (author, date) and for quotes (author, date, p. )

�No first person