Action Research Proposal

Action Research Proposal

The topic of my action research is the impact student centered instruction has on the academic success of my students. This idea of instruction starting with the students’ interests and then allowing students to explore and develop understanding is not typically what happens in classrooms today. However, I believe that when students have choices in how they are learning they will be more engaged in the topics being covered. A direct result of this engagement and choice will lead to the students creating deeper meaning to the content through the ownership that they will have in their learning. A classroom implementing student centered instruction will be louder and the students will be more active than the traditional classroom. I have observed traditional classes where the students aren’t allowed to talk to each other and the teacher is the source of the knowledge. I think that through student centered instruction my classroom would be louder, but it’s not the noise level but what is being said that matters. By designing student centered teaching/learning lesson plans, how will my 4^th grade students’ engagement, success and inquiry during math instruction improve?

A theoretical framework that supports my research question would a theory called constructivism. Alfie Kohn states that constructivism is where “children must be invited to reflect on complex issues, to recast them in light of their own experiences and questions, to figure out for themselves -- and with one another (Kohn, 1997)” the meaning of concepts. Constructivist do not see children as empty vessels in which need to be filled with knowledge, instead they provide opportunities for children to use their experiences and interests to make sense concepts that are taught in school. This theory is connected to the importance of my topic because it allows students to be the center of instruction and provides opportunities for students to be their own teachers while creating understanding through meaningful connections that they make between their lives and the content being taught.

The research for this proposal will be taking place in a 4^th grade classroom at an environmental science magnet school in Ogden Utah. There are twenty eight students, who are mostly white and middle class. Among the students there are three students are receive services for ESL and all of them has Spanish as their first language. These students’ identities will be protected through the use of pseudonyms.

The goal of this research is to collect both quantitative and qualitative data that will be support the study being done. The quantitative data will be used to support the qualitative data in a way that scores from formative and summative assessments will be used to create connections to anecdotal records as seen in case studies. The quantitative data will be designed similar to a group comparison design (Mertler, 2009), where summative assessments will be compared across the two other 4^th grade classes that have different approaches. Data will also be compared to how previous summative assessments were. Surveys and running records will also be used to assess the everyday activities and everyday perceptions of how the math and reading classes are being run by the students.

A mix between a quantitative and qualitative research design is an accurate way to gauge the success of cooperative learning techniques because it covers not only numerical data but also student’s feelings towards the content being covered. The quantitative group approach will allow me to compare if there is a numerical difference in success rates between a cooperative learning approach vs. a traditional approach. The data collected to support the successfulness of this research project will also be based on quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitatively speaking post tests and weekly formative tests will be used and compared to previous test scores and other test scores from other 4^th grade teachers. To ensure reliability weekly tests, and post tests will be done in the computer lab with zero help from instructors, unless stated in students’ IEPs. That data will then be analyzed through graphs and spread sheets.

Qualitative data will be designed and collected in a different way. With the quantitative group approach I will be comparing how the same set of students’ attitudes to learning, including engagement, inquiry, and motivation have been affected by the infusion of cooperative learning strategies. To collect data during the group approach there will be running record observations of student engagement and participation in class as well as student interviews and student surveys. To ensure the reliability and trustworthiness of the data, the qualitative methods will be done by more than one person and will be compiled together to get a full picture of the observations.

Both the qualitative and quantitative data will be analyzed with the aide of computer programs. Different graph representations, including bar graphs, stem and leaf plots, and line graphs will be used as a comparative measure for the formative and summative assessments. Inductive qualitative analysis will take place during the running records to show common themes observed (Mertler, 2009). Inferential analysis will be used to make statements based on small sample size comparisons of classes with twenty eight students in them (Mertler, 2009). The small sample size and limited comparisons between other classrooms could prevent gaps in the data and not provided for an accurate generalization. With a larger sample size and more classroom comparisons, the data and conclusions collected would have more empirical evidence to back it up.

Timeline for Action Research

· March 9^th: Student Pre Survey on traditional instruction in the classroom.

· Week of March 12^th: Cooperative Learning Strategy Implementation and Qualitative Data Collection.

· Week of March 12^th: Analysis of Pre Student Survey

· Week of March 19^th: Cooperative Learning Strategy Implementation and Data Collection (Post test data)

· Week of April 2^nd: Post Student Survey on how classroom instruction has changed.

· Week of April 2^nd: Data Analysis and Survey Analysis.

· Week of April 9^th: Data Conclusion as means to Action Research Question.

References

Kohn, A. (1997). How Not to Teach Values: A Critical Look at Character Education. PHI DELTA KAPPAN. Retrieved online from alfiekohn.org.

Mertler, C. (2009). Action research: Teachers as researchers in the classroom (2nd edition). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage.