I believe the most important thing I learned through this course is that action research/administrative inquiry is studying real existing issues within your own surroundings, examining one’s own practice, seeking out information regarding the dilemma, and implementing change based on learning. I dreaded this class because I thought I was going to have to pick a topic in the wide world of education that had already been researched to the hilt, research the research and type a paper based on my research of the research. I was pleased to discover that action research was not that process at all. What I learned through this class was a systematic approach to turning already existing wonderings, problems, dilemmas, and inquiries into innovative change supported by sound research.
I learned that we already examine our own practice, if we didn’t we wouldn’t be effective in the education field however engaging in inquiry allows us to grow professionally as a result of active examination and intended change. Dana discusses the isolation that administrators experience due to their position of ultimate responsibility and suggests that administrative inquiry “challenges these norms” by being surrounded “with other professionals conversing about practice in systematic and meaningful ways” (Dana, 2009).
I learned that reflection is a vital part of administrative practice and intentional change must result from reflection to ensure improvement. Watching the lecture for week 2 and listening to professionals that are or have been engaged in action research was interesting and made the process more realistic. I also learned from the suggestions they made that you should make sure your inquiry will increase student performance. I also learned that it is not enough anymore to learn content and pedagogy and that we as professionals in education we must have a continual mindset of inquiry. I learned that inquiry can look good for publication but if it is not applicable then it is not worth it.
I struggled to pin down a topic for my action research but once I did putting my thoughts in to questions and formulating a plan to carry out the answering the questions made action research really come alive. By articulating my plan step by step, determining the person who will carry out each step, establishing a timeline, determining the resources needed and how the steps will be evaluated I could see my questions turn into something that could examined and I could see the potential for change and improvement. I also learned from interacting with my peers on the discussion boards in that there are infinite topics to choose from out there. Reading their inquiry plans were interesting and I found myself participating in the discussion boards more during these 5 weeks. Everyone had different questions they wanted to explore however; I had tremendous interest in many of their inquiries as did other classmates.
Overall I believe I learned a great deal from this course that has changed my perspective of research. Learning that inquiry is the examination of one’s own practice, and seeking out answers to one’s wonderings in a systematic way to implement change and improve student performance has not only changed my perspective of research but made it more applicable and realistic. I will take the suggestions from the lecture and make sure that my inquiry is directly related to improving student performance. I will also heed Dana’s advice to purposefully allot time in my weekly schedule to focus on completing an activity related to my inquiry on a consistent basis. I believe that I will be continually inquiring as an administrator and this course has given me the roadmap I needed to formulate those inquiries into realistic plans that will result in positive, effective and lasting change.
Arterbury, Dr. E, & Jenkins, Dr. S. (2010, summer semester). Research, EDLD
5301. Class Lecture. Lamar University.
Dana, N.F. (2009). Leading with passion and knowledge: The principal as action
researcher. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Friday, August 6, 2010
Meeting
I met with my new principal on my new campus yesterday and briefly discussed my research plan. Since he is new to the campus and district his time is very precious. I did not get a chance to share the plan I have laid out step by step but I did get his approval on my topic and inquiry. He referenced several programs that act as positive behavioral interventions but stated that the existing tier system is a good approach as long as it doesn't have too many steps. He said it gives those in the office a chance to establish a relationship with the student before the student is slapped with a stiff penalty for on offense. He also said one of the problems is that some teachers wait too long to write a student up and by the time the office referral happens the teacher is fed up and when the administrator doesn't not administer a harsh enough consequence in the teacher's eyes then he/she is upset.
Because I was not given the opportunity to fully discuss all aspects of my research plan with him he did not understand what I was attempting. My rational is that discipline should be individualized yet remain fair. From my brief conversation with him it is apparent to me that he is pretty set on his discipline. Because of this, I don't think my project will result in any changes until I actually am in an administrative position to do so.
In the meantime, my research plan will stay as it is. The only change I will have to make is the formation of a committee. I anticipated having to do this and included it because it was a suggestion from my readings. Once again I think this will be another project that I will complete on my own.
Because I was not given the opportunity to fully discuss all aspects of my research plan with him he did not understand what I was attempting. My rational is that discipline should be individualized yet remain fair. From my brief conversation with him it is apparent to me that he is pretty set on his discipline. Because of this, I don't think my project will result in any changes until I actually am in an administrative position to do so.
In the meantime, my research plan will stay as it is. The only change I will have to make is the formation of a committee. I anticipated having to do this and included it because it was a suggestion from my readings. Once again I think this will be another project that I will complete on my own.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Action Draft Plan
Goals:
1. To decrease the necessity for disciplinary actions by establishing more effective consequences.
2. To individualize discipline yet remain fair.
3. Restructure ISS to better support student’s academic performance.
Steps:
1. Create a Discipline Review Committee consisting of the ISS instructors, myself and interested teachers.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
Timeline:
Last week of August
Needed Resources:
Sign-up sheet posted in workroom
Evaluation:
Those interested will sign-up to participate. The more interested parties the hotter the topic might be in my opinion.
2. Examine office referrals and look for patterns and repeat offenders
Person(s) Responsible
Tanna Padgett
Committee members
Timeline:
Last week of August.
Needed Resources:
Access to office referrals from the previous years. To be accessed through Mr. Flowers.
Findings typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Finding repeat offenders serves as a basis for necessary review of current practices.
3. Interview teachers and administrators to ascertain how they document student behavior and actions taken.
Person(s) Responsible
Tanna Padgett
Administrator (Mr. Flowers)
Teachers (to be determined)
Committee Members
Timeline:
First week of September.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed by myself using Microsoft Word.
Teachers and administrators willing to be interviewed.
Time to converse with various teachers and with the administrator.
Answers typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Different documentation practices.
4. Examine samples of documentation.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee members
Timeline:
First week of September.
Needed Resources:
Access to documentation from teachers and administrators.
Findings and Conclusions typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Actual documentation. Is it sufficient? Can it be more consistent and streamlined?
5. Examine current handbook and disciplinary policies to become familiar with them.
Person(s) Responsible
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members.
Timeline:
Second week of September.
Needed Resources:
Access to disciplinary policies and current handbook gained from Mr. Flowers.
Reflection typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Current policies and practices.
6. Search the Internet for literature regarding alternate disciplinary techniques
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members
Timeline:
Third week of September.
Needed Resources:
Internet access.
Findings recorded using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Do we have the resources to implement alternate disciplinary techniques suggested by our literature search?
7. Interview teachers to gain insight regarding their opinions of current policies and solicit suggestions for improvement and individualization.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Teachers (to be determined)
Committee members
Timeline:
Fourth week of September.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed using Microsoft Word.
Willing teachers and time to converse with various teachers.
Responses and suggestions typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Teacher responses.
Teacher suggestions – Are they feasible? Do we have the resources to accomplish what is suggested?
8. Examine grades of students that have had an ISS placement.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members.
Timeline:
First week of October
Needed Resources:
Access to student’s grades that had ISS placements in the previous years gained from Mr. Flowers.
Findings and conclusions typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Do students’ grades decline while placed in ISS?
9. Search for information regarding the effects of ISS on student performance.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members
Timeline:
Second week of October.
Needed Resources:
Internet access.
Findings recorded using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Does what the literature suggest support what we see in student performance at our campus?
10 Interview ISS instructors to determine instructional needs.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
ISS instructors (to be determined)
Committee members
Timeline:
Third week of October.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed using Microsoft Word.
ISS instructors willing to discuss needs.
Time to converse with ISS instructors.
Responses typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
ISS instructor responses – can we accommodate their needs? How?
Do we have the resources for their needs?
11 Interview teachers, administrators and ISS instructors to gain insight to the communication problem.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
ISS Instructors (to be determined).
Committee Members
Timeline:
Third week of October.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed using Microsoft Word.
Willing teachers, administrator, and ISS instructors and time to converse with each stakeholder individually.
Responses typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
What prevents effective and timely communication at each interval?
How do we improve communication?
12. Survey students, teachers, administrators, ISS instructors regarding ISS placement, needs, and improvements.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
Teachers (to be determined)
ISS instructors (to be determined)
Students (to be determined).
Committee Members
Timeline:
Fourth week of October.
Needed Resources:
A survey developed by myself using Word.
Possible reference material:
Fowler’s Survey Research Methods (2002)
Czaja and Blair’s Designing Surveys; A Guide to Decisions and Procedures (2005)
Students, teachers, administrators, and ISS instructors willing to participate.
Evaluation:
Results of the survey.
What does the survey reveal to the committee regarding needs? Improvements?
13 Compile and examine data collected from surveys.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members
Timeline:
First week of November.
Needed Resources:
Completed surveys.
Excel to organize results.
Word to verbalize findings and conclusions.
Evaluation:
Survey results.
How can we begin to make improvements and ensure needs are met?
14 Present findings and make suggestions to administrators based on research.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
Committee Members
Timeline:
Third week of November.
Needed Resources:
Power point presentation prepared by myself.
Findings and conclusions typed using Microsoft Word.
Appointment with Mr. Flowers
Evaluation:
Did our inquiry reveal necessity for change?
Can we make recommended improvements?
1. To decrease the necessity for disciplinary actions by establishing more effective consequences.
2. To individualize discipline yet remain fair.
3. Restructure ISS to better support student’s academic performance.
Steps:
1. Create a Discipline Review Committee consisting of the ISS instructors, myself and interested teachers.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
Timeline:
Last week of August
Needed Resources:
Sign-up sheet posted in workroom
Evaluation:
Those interested will sign-up to participate. The more interested parties the hotter the topic might be in my opinion.
2. Examine office referrals and look for patterns and repeat offenders
Person(s) Responsible
Tanna Padgett
Committee members
Timeline:
Last week of August.
Needed Resources:
Access to office referrals from the previous years. To be accessed through Mr. Flowers.
Findings typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Finding repeat offenders serves as a basis for necessary review of current practices.
3. Interview teachers and administrators to ascertain how they document student behavior and actions taken.
Person(s) Responsible
Tanna Padgett
Administrator (Mr. Flowers)
Teachers (to be determined)
Committee Members
Timeline:
First week of September.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed by myself using Microsoft Word.
Teachers and administrators willing to be interviewed.
Time to converse with various teachers and with the administrator.
Answers typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Different documentation practices.
4. Examine samples of documentation.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee members
Timeline:
First week of September.
Needed Resources:
Access to documentation from teachers and administrators.
Findings and Conclusions typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Actual documentation. Is it sufficient? Can it be more consistent and streamlined?
5. Examine current handbook and disciplinary policies to become familiar with them.
Person(s) Responsible
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members.
Timeline:
Second week of September.
Needed Resources:
Access to disciplinary policies and current handbook gained from Mr. Flowers.
Reflection typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Current policies and practices.
6. Search the Internet for literature regarding alternate disciplinary techniques
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members
Timeline:
Third week of September.
Needed Resources:
Internet access.
Findings recorded using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Do we have the resources to implement alternate disciplinary techniques suggested by our literature search?
7. Interview teachers to gain insight regarding their opinions of current policies and solicit suggestions for improvement and individualization.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Teachers (to be determined)
Committee members
Timeline:
Fourth week of September.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed using Microsoft Word.
Willing teachers and time to converse with various teachers.
Responses and suggestions typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Teacher responses.
Teacher suggestions – Are they feasible? Do we have the resources to accomplish what is suggested?
8. Examine grades of students that have had an ISS placement.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members.
Timeline:
First week of October
Needed Resources:
Access to student’s grades that had ISS placements in the previous years gained from Mr. Flowers.
Findings and conclusions typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Do students’ grades decline while placed in ISS?
9. Search for information regarding the effects of ISS on student performance.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members
Timeline:
Second week of October.
Needed Resources:
Internet access.
Findings recorded using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
Does what the literature suggest support what we see in student performance at our campus?
10 Interview ISS instructors to determine instructional needs.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
ISS instructors (to be determined)
Committee members
Timeline:
Third week of October.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed using Microsoft Word.
ISS instructors willing to discuss needs.
Time to converse with ISS instructors.
Responses typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
ISS instructor responses – can we accommodate their needs? How?
Do we have the resources for their needs?
11 Interview teachers, administrators and ISS instructors to gain insight to the communication problem.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
ISS Instructors (to be determined).
Committee Members
Timeline:
Third week of October.
Needed Resources:
Interview questions typed using Microsoft Word.
Willing teachers, administrator, and ISS instructors and time to converse with each stakeholder individually.
Responses typed using Microsoft Word.
Evaluation:
What prevents effective and timely communication at each interval?
How do we improve communication?
12. Survey students, teachers, administrators, ISS instructors regarding ISS placement, needs, and improvements.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
Teachers (to be determined)
ISS instructors (to be determined)
Students (to be determined).
Committee Members
Timeline:
Fourth week of October.
Needed Resources:
A survey developed by myself using Word.
Possible reference material:
Fowler’s Survey Research Methods (2002)
Czaja and Blair’s Designing Surveys; A Guide to Decisions and Procedures (2005)
Students, teachers, administrators, and ISS instructors willing to participate.
Evaluation:
Results of the survey.
What does the survey reveal to the committee regarding needs? Improvements?
13 Compile and examine data collected from surveys.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Committee Members
Timeline:
First week of November.
Needed Resources:
Completed surveys.
Excel to organize results.
Word to verbalize findings and conclusions.
Evaluation:
Survey results.
How can we begin to make improvements and ensure needs are met?
14 Present findings and make suggestions to administrators based on research.
Person(s) Responsible:
Tanna Padgett
Mr. Flowers
Committee Members
Timeline:
Third week of November.
Needed Resources:
Power point presentation prepared by myself.
Findings and conclusions typed using Microsoft Word.
Appointment with Mr. Flowers
Evaluation:
Did our inquiry reveal necessity for change?
Can we make recommended improvements?
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Week 2 Reflection
I have to admit, I really struggled with coming up with an inquiry or project to research. I was drawing a complete blank. I am in transition right now from an elementary campus to a middle school campus and my new campus is without any administrators at the moment. I do not have a site supervisor to refer to therefore I sought out my superintendent and my assistant superintendent. I have since found out that my superintendent has taken a position with another district. In light of all of the changing going on I was not surprised to get no more than a response of "I will have to get back to you on that".
After completing the reading assignment for this week I realized I was trying to make this more that what it was. I realized that inquiry was just that...asking questions and then finding the answers. Every passion I read discussed very specific campus situations and wonderings that the administrators had. This seemed to put it all into a different perspective for me. We as educators ask questions all the time and seek out answers to resolve our wonderings. I am beginning to understand that action research is just the formalization of that process. It seemed less daunting when I began to understand this and I was able to focus my thoughts on my own wonderings. I was also encouraged by all of the interviews that I watched suggesting not to reinvent the wheel. Part of researching answers to questions that have regarding improvement is to find what other people have done and written about and pull from it what is applicable or use it to develop my own answers.
I have a completely different perspective of action at the end of this week's work as what I did before I began. I have also been able to pinpoint an inquiry that I will be able to pursue despite the lack of site supervisor interaction.
After completing the reading assignment for this week I realized I was trying to make this more that what it was. I realized that inquiry was just that...asking questions and then finding the answers. Every passion I read discussed very specific campus situations and wonderings that the administrators had. This seemed to put it all into a different perspective for me. We as educators ask questions all the time and seek out answers to resolve our wonderings. I am beginning to understand that action research is just the formalization of that process. It seemed less daunting when I began to understand this and I was able to focus my thoughts on my own wonderings. I was also encouraged by all of the interviews that I watched suggesting not to reinvent the wheel. Part of researching answers to questions that have regarding improvement is to find what other people have done and written about and pull from it what is applicable or use it to develop my own answers.
I have a completely different perspective of action at the end of this week's work as what I did before I began. I have also been able to pinpoint an inquiry that I will be able to pursue despite the lack of site supervisor interaction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)